131–140 of 214 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
for what? managed postgres and some ml training tools?
because it's recommended by nearly all consultants and Microsoft. Simple as that, it's consulting Heaven. Much like SAS and SAP. Everybody happy. Now to be far to databricks, if used properly and ignore the cost, it does actually function pretty well. Compared to Synapse, PowerBI Tabular, Fabric, Azure ML, ... that's already a big big big step forward.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This. To me if you are still unprofitable after 15 years you are not really a business. However genuinely curious about the thesis applied by the VC’s/Funds that invest in such a late stage round? Is it simply they are taking a chance that they won’t be the last person holding the potato? Like they will get out in series L or M rounds or the company may IPO by then. Either ways they will make a small return? Or is th…
The last person in usually gets the best deal, in that they can get preference and push everyone else (previous investors, founders, and employees) down. If things goes south, they get their money out before anyone else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The last person in usually gets the best deal, in that they can get preference and push everyone else (previous investors, founders, and employees) down. If things goes south, they get their money out before anyone else.
Why don't early investors put clauses in their investment to protect themselves against being screwed over by later investors? It seems like an obvious thing to ask for if you're giving someone a lot of money, so I'm assuming there must be a very good reason it's not done.
Its less financially/legally saavy parties like angel investors and early employees who (sometimes) get screwed out of valuation
What’s the obvious rationale for going through the whole alphabet of funding rounds, instead of going public / IPO after «the usual» number of raising money. Wouldn’t the current strategy result in some serious stock dilution for the early investors?
Investors put 10 billion in in a previous round; that's a lot. Somehow, more is needed now. 100M is just 1% of that. So it's not going to massively move the needle. But it does raise the question where all that cash is going. My guess is that they might be about to embark on a shopping spree and acquire some more VC backed companies. They've actually bought quite a few companies already in the past few years. And the…
The company itself seems healthy and generating revenue
Regardless of the product and idea they had, a company that is 15 years old and raised 10+ billion dollars still needing to raise money after all this time is ridiculous. Not being sustainable after all this time and billions of dollars is a sign company is just burning money, and a lot of it. wework vibes.
This. To me if you are still unprofitable after 15 years you are not really a business. However genuinely curious about the thesis applied by the VC’s/Funds that invest in such a late stage round? Is it simply they are taking a chance that they won’t be the last person holding the potato? Like they will get out in series L or M rounds or the company may IPO by then. Either ways they will make a small return? Or is th…
1) It's evaluated as any other deal. If you model out a good return quantitatively/qualitatively, then you do the deal. Doesn't really matter how far along it is.
2) Large private funds have far fewer opportunities to deploy because of the scale. If you have a $10B fund, you'd need to fund 2,000 seed companies (at a generous $5m on $25m cap). Obviously that's not scalable and too diversified. With this Databricks round, you can invest a few billion in one go, which solves both problems.
Are there any cheaper alternatives to Databricks, EC2, DynamoDB, S3 solution? Where cost is more predictable and controlled? What's a good roll your own solution? DB storage doesn't need to be dynamic like with DynamoDB. At max 1TB - maybe double in the future. Could this be done on a mid size VPS (32GB RAM) hosting Apache Spark etc - or better to have a couple? P.S. total beginner in this space, hence the (naive) qu…
I don't think there is anything out there that really bundles everything exactly like databricks does. There are better storage solutions, better compute and better AI/ML platforms, but once you start with databricks, you dig yourself a hole because the replacing it is hard because it has such a specific subset of features across multiple domains. In our multinational environment, we have a few companies that are on…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The last person in usually gets the best deal, in that they can get preference and push everyone else (previous investors, founders, and employees) down. If things goes south, they get their money out before anyone else.
Why don't early investors put clauses in their investment to protect themselves against being screwed over by later investors? It seems like an obvious thing to ask for if you're giving someone a lot of money, so I'm assuming there must be a very good reason it's not done.
But the pref stack always favors later investors, partly because that's just the way it's always been, and if you try to change that now no one will take your money, and later investors will not want to invest in a company unless they get the senior liquidity pref.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do we know that they need to raise and are not sustainable? I don't think them raising is evidence of either.
Why would they raise money if they do not need? Raising money dilutes existing shareholders - who are probably not too happy about it.