Thanks. Please write more frequently.
VCs are scared when they should be greedy
121–130 of 255 posts
Re: VCs are scared when they should be greedy
#122> In contrast with the scenario in 2000, most of today’s tech companies are real businesses. How many of today's startups are just servicing each other with VC money? This isn't meant to be flippant - I'm genuinely curious (and while I bet it's a lot, I am skeptical it is overwhelming). I mean if we really look at some of the business models for these companies, they're clearly unsustainable. Uber is a prime example…
How many times has Detroit, housing, and finance been bailed out?
They’re all operating on magical money because money is a shared hallucination. They legalize bailouts and complain about the debt but never mention the future can just say, eh, fuck those dead peoples bullshit.
The bias you seem to not realize you’re hung up on is society looks nothing like it did 100 years ago. In another 100 they won’t give a fuck about any of this.
If we take away the money, people still need to do shit if they want to survive. Fuck their money, do weird shit. Let the olds take it to the grave.
Re: VCs are scared when they should be greedy
#123(Context: I'm a VC) Some great points in the post, but I also see a few additional dynamics at play: 1) The last 10 years have been great for VCs and startups, but now VCs are thinking about how to make their funds last longer. Two reasons for this: first, time diversification matters. If you think markets might go down even more, you don't want to deploy the rest of your fund quickly, you want to spread it out over…
On (4), it looks like the median seed valuation is still hovering around $25M based on AngelList statistics: https://stack.angellist.com/valuations Part of the difficulty in parsing public versus private company valuations is due to the time constant: It takes a while for private companies to get desperate, whereas public companies have a real-time bead on investor sentiment.
Angellists data is flawed here—- you ideally want to look at seeds that are completely new or coming from sub $2 million pre-seeds. They include seed extensions, seed extension extensions, high priced note extension to seed rounds, etc. and when the market slows down you see a lot of extension rounds which pushes that number up but those are not really new seed rounds.
There are a host of other way their data is flawed as well :) but that’s a much longer topic.
Re: VCs are scared when they should be greedy
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't this what YC does essentially? YC backed SaaS companies buy each others products, write favorable case studies and use that to convince other enterprises to buy in, and to IPO quickly they raise lot of money to have the market share that commands the multi billion valuations with insane revenue multiples? Seems like this model is beginning to fail, most YC backed IPOs are now trading in deep red. ex) coinbase e…
100% this - a good chunk of initial traction for YC companies is other YC companies - which is great in some ways to bootstrap initial growth/credibility, but the uncharitable view is that it's a Ponzi scheme in a way.
I think Ponzi is an overstatement, though I agree with the general sentiment.
There's in principle nothing wrong with clusters of companies that are inter-dependent on selling stuff to each other. Car parts manufacturers live and die by the big car companies - and to some degree vice versa - but we would hesitate to call that a Ponzi scheme.
The key is whether or not this clustered ecosystem is bringing in money from the outside. Somebody in the ecosystem has to be making money from the "outside" world. It's the sustainability of this outside connection that really matters.
For a lot of SaaS companies I think the rude wakeup is that the "outside" source of money was never an actual business but instead was just endless rounds of VC cash. Likewise (and IMO more offensively) with crypto the "outside" money source was hyped-up retail investors (and hyped-up VCs) and not any actual useful business.
I do agree though - the VC sphere has spent the last 10+ years building up an entire web of companies that inter-depend on each other but where the "outside money" was always highly dubious. This is distinctly unlike the older crop of BigTech companies where the outside money is (relatively) stable: actual advertising, actual hardware in people's hands...
Re: VCs are scared when they should be greedy
#125> In contrast with the scenario in 2000, most of today’s tech companies are real businesses. How many of today's startups are just servicing each other with VC money? This isn't meant to be flippant - I'm genuinely curious (and while I bet it's a lot, I am skeptical it is overwhelming). I mean if we really look at some of the business models for these companies, they're clearly unsustainable. Uber is a prime example…
It seems to me the VCs probably made quite a bit of money from Uber's IPO, no? Especially before their stock price halved itself (LOL).
Re: VCs are scared when they should be greedy
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree, I think this is an inefficiency. But it's a tough one to correct because startups are a repeated game, and everyone's worried about upsetting people they'll have to keep playing with. I think the logic is "I like this company, but if I offer a down round then will I piss off their existing investors? Will those investors stop sharing good investment opportunities with me? ... Ah screw it, I'll just skip this…
Down rounds are bad for employee morale too since it puts previously issued options below water. It's probably worth it to re-issue equity, but that's messy and a lot of companies don't do it.
At a previous company all of the employees (there weren't many left) demanded options be repriced. They were. Unfortunately, they still were worthless when the company was "acquired" in a fire sale.
Re: VCs are scared when they should be greedy
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How many of today's startups are just servicing each other with VC money? IMHO this is mostly the a phenomenon of the SAAS/platform space. Those practices don’t really apply to more traditional businesses (including high tech ones). But you made me think of something else: this phenomenon was definitely booming in the 2000 crash, when net-related hardware companies were underwriting their own sales, which ended qui…
Isn't this what YC does essentially? YC backed SaaS companies buy each others products, write favorable case studies and use that to convince other enterprises to buy in, and to IPO quickly they raise lot of money to have the market share that commands the multi billion valuations with insane revenue multiples? Seems like this model is beginning to fail, most YC backed IPOs are now trading in deep red. ex) coinbase e…
> What I think we are headed for is something unprecedented because there are 3 major bubbles imploding: crypto, real estate, dot com
Crypto is an almost invisible blip on the scale of the financial system. Real estate, well, there's a shortage, so I think it will take a very long time to unwind.
Dot com -- yeh, it's a mix of unsustainable Doordash/Uber/Airbnb, SaaS-for-the-SaaS market (both of which are ponzis in the context of this thread) and "AI"/"Data Science" puffery. I still can't tell if the reckoning will be quick, or if the air will simply slowly leak out.
Re: VCs are scared when they should be greedy
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
Driver fees are already so low that between depreciation, gas, and your time, you're barely making ends meet driving. They can't squeeze the drivers any further, unless they only want people to be driving 15-year-old beaters.
Boy, this is an evergreen narrative on HN, but I don't really think it's true. The total all-in cost of a Prius (depreciation, maintenance, gasoline, etc...) is about 30 cents per mile. Uber drivers make about $1-$2 per mile which is a pretty big margin. Uber has been around for over 10 years now. Sure, not everyone is an accountant, but if Uber drained every driver's wallet, they'd have noticed by now. Interesting t…
Uber drivers don't make anywhere near $1-$2 per mile. More like $0.50-$1 according to some Googling ($1 seems reasonable from conversations with friends who drive for them, here in Austin).
30 cents per mile costs is also extremely low, at least on average.
Re: VCs are scared when they should be greedy
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I think tech investors are unable to see their bias for just how awful most tech companies today are I agree. Ecomm broke first in other markets, and I am seeing profitable ecomm companies still having to raise capital. Uber is one of the worst ones (they took a business that is very profitable, and lost absolutely staggering amounts of money, they probably need to cut 50% of the workforce to start with, and then k…
I agree, crypto and fintech will be the first dominos to fall - they’re in free fall already. There’s a lot of copycat B2B startups that extremely dependent on crypto and fintech for their revenue. They will be the next domino to fall. After that, it would be infrastructure, security, and analytics vendors that will face a revenue crunch and will be unable to raise another round of funding. And then, all the startups…
I will disagree on Figma. It's taken a huge chunk of workflows at some extremely old school businesses. Amidst a sea of shitcorps it is the real deal.
Re: VCs are scared when they should be greedy
#130> In contrast with the scenario in 2000, most of today’s tech companies are real businesses. How many of today's startups are just servicing each other with VC money? This isn't meant to be flippant - I'm genuinely curious (and while I bet it's a lot, I am skeptical it is overwhelming). I mean if we really look at some of the business models for these companies, they're clearly unsustainable. Uber is a prime example…
Very good points MegaButts. Crypto is VC funded too. Hence the crazy market caps because most of the VC owned supply is locked up.
No post body was provided.