Steve Blank's "accelerator" view of VC financing begs this question: why not raise debt instead of equity?
Any banker will agree that equity is the worst way to raise funds. It's a fair deal if the investor is taking a risk. But if you really have a working business model, that "just needs money", I don't think there is that much risk... normally the risk is the discovery of that model.
hmmm... thats a good idea. If you're running a profitable business that just wants a little money to grow, and you know you'll be able to pay that back, then debt might just be the better (and lower risk) way to go.
But obviously, lower risk means lower returns. Why else do VCs ask that you have more "traction"? They want lower risk for themselves, yet being able to insure that they'll maximize their returns.
Pretty good deal for the investors, if you ask me.
Just this week, I was talking to some well-known venture capitalists about my company, told them about the idea, talked about the market, and one of the first questions they asked was 'do you have a website yet?' Well, not only do we have a website up, but we have a product AND paying customers! And they were stunned because the majority of entrepreneurs who pitch them have nothing to show for but a nice powerpoint presentation.
Very interesting.
Wow. If a .ppt-type of presentation alone is enough to wow the VC people, I'm obviously doing something wrong.
Mah's approach is smart, kinda like mine: don't ask for it unless it's needed; use what you have efficiently.
The multiple-zero VC stuff is too easily manipulated.
I think it's important to just sit down and have a casual chat - no expectations, no presentations, no real "preparation". Just talk to them as you would to a hot girl on your first date! Too many people rush into trying to impress investors the traditional way, and that never made much sense to me.
6 comments
[ 4.7 ms ] story [ 23.8 ms ] threadAny banker will agree that equity is the worst way to raise funds. It's a fair deal if the investor is taking a risk. But if you really have a working business model, that "just needs money", I don't think there is that much risk... normally the risk is the discovery of that model.
But obviously, lower risk means lower returns. Why else do VCs ask that you have more "traction"? They want lower risk for themselves, yet being able to insure that they'll maximize their returns.
Pretty good deal for the investors, if you ask me.
Very interesting.
Wow. If a .ppt-type of presentation alone is enough to wow the VC people, I'm obviously doing something wrong.
Mah's approach is smart, kinda like mine: don't ask for it unless it's needed; use what you have efficiently.
The multiple-zero VC stuff is too easily manipulated.
(narcissistic & self-obsessed == LeahCulver.com variety of) female;
I wish my work could just speak for itself without all the marketing hype and baloney.