Live data from Hacker News

Why I decided to take the money and sell my startup

entrepreneur.com

11–20 of 26 posts

Re: Why I decided to take the money and sell my startup

#11

Are those examples at the end his? He totally dismisses Groupon's rejection of Google's offer, when there were almost certainly some sort of earn-out. I'm sure if Google were offering $8B in cash with no performance requirements, they would have taken the money. But that's not how deals work, and Groupon could very well have decided an IPO would lead to a much surer return. I would expect a less shallow analysis from…

>He totally dismisses Groupon's rejection of Google's offer

He doesn't totally dismiss it - his reaction was provocative but much more measured than "totally dismissed". For reference:

"Will the public market tip the deal in Groupon's favor, or will Mason--like many of his would-be customers--wish he had bitten on that offer?"

Re: Why I decided to take the money and sell my startup

#12
post #7

"Too many founders let emotions and egos cloud a decision that is really a number crunch. Once you accept that there will always be richer and wiser people out there, you'll find that they didn't get that way by taking dumb bets." Maybe I'll always live in a crummy apartment and have Ramen for Thanksgiving but I completely disagree with this. How I choose to spend the next 3 years of my life is hardly just a number c…

Making money is not antithetical to learning, building, and growing. In fact, I'd argue that the more you do of the latter, the more you earn of the former.

Re: Why I decided to take the money and sell my startup

#14
Also, note that the value of money is not linear: I'll take $500k over a 50% chance of $1M. In fact, I'll happily take $400k over a 50% chance of $1M.

(Interestingly, I seem to recall some research that showed that, essentially, owners of big companies tend to refuse $600k over a 50% chance of $1M.)

Re: Why I decided to take the money and sell my startup

#15
post #4

Anyone else who doesn't understand his example? If my company is valued at $1M and someone invests $1M in it, why do I still own 50% of the company after the investment, as the author said? Doesn't this mean the company is actually valued at $2M?

Suppose your company is valued at $1M, and you own all of it. Your holding is worth $1M. Obviously.

Suppose now someone comes along to invest, and they put in $3M to the company. What percentage equity should you each now hold?

Simplistically, your holding should still be worth $1M, and their holding should be worth $3M. The company is now worth $4M, comprised of the $1M it was worth to begin with, plus another $3M in cash (or promises or whatever). You should have $1M of that, so now you own 25% of the company. The investor should have $3M of value, so they own 75% of that $4M total.

So on the surface, neither of you have gained. Except now the company has a shed-load of money, and so it can invest and trade more aggressively, thereby increasing its value. As a result, the company increases in value, and your 25% holding goes up in value.

Pretty much all trades and investments can be assessed like this, but with some refinements, in particular, factoring in the expectation of success.

Consider pitching for an investment. You value the company at $1M, you want $500K, so after the investment the company will be worth $1.5M and you will own 67% of that. Based on that assessment, you should be offering 33% equity for that $500K. But the investor will disagree with your assessment, saying that the company is now, currently, before investment, as not worth $1M. Perhaps they will say that without investment your company is only worth $500K. As a result, post-investment your company is worth $1M and you should each get half the equity. The gain for you both is that now, with the cash (and possibly expertise) of the investor, perhaps the company really is now worth $1.5M, so your 50% is now worth $750K, and the investor has immediately gained $250K (on paper).

The mis-match in the assessments of an owner and a potential investor is an area of considerable research and discussion, sometimes heated, but the above (very simplistic) analysis is a useful starting point. It largely matches the analysis he gives about selling to a competitor at $500K versus taking investment at $500K hoping to grow the company to $5M (giving him 50% of that, with a 20% chance of succeeding, making it worth an expected $500K)

Re: Why I decided to take the money and sell my startup

#16
post #7

"Too many founders let emotions and egos cloud a decision that is really a number crunch. Once you accept that there will always be richer and wiser people out there, you'll find that they didn't get that way by taking dumb bets." Maybe I'll always live in a crummy apartment and have Ramen for Thanksgiving but I completely disagree with this. How I choose to spend the next 3 years of my life is hardly just a number c…

Well, if you're so inclined you could use part of the 500k to bootstrap another projcet and continue your happy startup existence only with less Ramen. (Unless you just really like Ramen, of course).

This is true, but a live one in the hand may be worth more than $500K in the bank. It all depends on your own estimation of the probability of eventual success, and your ability to accurately make that estimation in the first place.

Re: Why I decided to take the money and sell my startup

#17
Actually, our MBA completely botched the risk portion of his calculations, which are built on a completely incorrect premise. The 20% probability of getting $2.5M does not translate to 100% probability of getting 20% of that amount, i.e. $500k.

He wrote: "Let's see how you, the founder, should make out if successful." This means that the whole scenario depends on the plan succeeding, so his calculating the risk-adjusted return is incorrect. If successful, the founder will get $2.5M; if not, he'll get anything from 0 to that amount. Also, there is a non-zero chance that the company will be worth $100M after three years; shouldn't that be included too?

Re: Why I decided to take the money and sell my startup

#18

Also, note that the value of money is not linear: I'll take $500k over a 50% chance of $1M. In fact, I'll happily take $400k over a 50% chance of $1M. (Interestingly, I seem to recall some research that showed that, essentially, owners of big companies tend to refuse $600k over a 50% chance of $1M.)

TRue. Add to that, reality is a distribution of outcomes, not just a single percent chance. Nobody's mentioning the 'tail of the curve' where you make $1B in 7 years. And everything in between. Integrate P(evt)*Yield(evt) over all outcomes for a real valuation.

Re: Why I decided to take the money and sell my startup

#19

  "When logic clouds reason"
Lets take this up a notch. If a open a startup today, statistically my chances of a $500K exit in two years (like his) are pretty slim. Lets say 20% ?

So, if I go for it I have a projected $50K/year for next two years. Or, I can go work somewhere and get $100K/year.

Ergo, starting a startup is foolish.

Anyone hiring ?

Re: Why I decided to take the money and sell my startup

#20
post #19

"When logic clouds reason" Lets take this up a notch. If a open a startup today, statistically my chances of a $500K exit in two years (like his) are pretty slim. Lets say 20% ? So, if I go for it I have a projected $50K/year for next two years. Or, I can go work somewhere and get $100K/year. Ergo, starting a startup is foolish. Anyone hiring ?

He's only using the 500k in his examples. Given the size of SVM, LP who bought giftzip.com I am certain he made much more than 500k.
Post reply on HN