Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How I raised a $5.1M seed as a first-time, female, solo founder for a biotech co

celinehh.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 251 posts

Re: How I raised a $5.1M seed as a first-time, female, solo founder for a biotech co

#201

Post by b20000 »

dougSF70 wrote: post #147
topherpalmtree wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, much less a working product. Tech vc is sprinkling money around hoping to grow magic. If you have revenue it probably isn’t speculative magic revenue.

Exactly, if you making money it suggests there is a market , that means there must be competitors....even though every unicorn start up ends up with many competitors...and if there are competitors it's not venture fundable..

when asked if there are competitors, regardless of what we answered, the answer was wrong. that again proves my point that all that matters is that investors know you, and that requires a lot of time, which becomes extremely expensive if you are in silicon valley, and only affordable if you are already rich or have a family that’s rich, and do not have to build a product.

Re: How I raised a $5.1M seed as a first-time, female, solo founder for a biotech co

#202

Post by [deleted] »

belorn wrote: post #167
dang wrote: post #40

This article got a lot of user flags. That's bad—it's obviously a substantive article, squarely on topic for HN and not sensational, ideological, or predictable. Even a quick skim is enough to see that it doesn't break down along any of the obvious faultlines for this general topic. That not only means it shouldn't have been flagged, it makes it HN gold. If you've been wielding the flag club that indiscriminately...p…

I don't understand this comment. Below we see plenty of dead comments posted at an earlier time, which seems to illustrate some existence of fuel for internet drama. At this time the first 50% of the comment page does not discuss gender so it clearly turned out right, but they were posted after the dead comments. If a fresh article has the majority of comments being people warring about gender then the option given t…

[deleted]

Re: How I raised a $5.1M seed as a first-time, female, solo founder for a biotech co

#203

Post by belorn »

walterbell wrote: post #170
belorn wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this comment. Below we see plenty of dead comments posted at an earlier time, which seems to illustrate some existence of fuel for internet drama. At this time the first 50% of the comment page does not discuss gender so it clearly turned out right, but they were posted after the dead comments. If a fresh article has the majority of comments being people warring about gender then the option given t…

There are separate flags for comments and articles. At the time of erroneous article flagging, there were worthwhile comments on this article.

The important question is when the flagging occurred by the users. If the flagging occured when most comments were culture warring, and the moderators find that to be inappropriate, then it would be good to know for future reference. If most users pressed the flag button long after the discussion switched to be more productive then I can understand what dang is talking about, but from his post I can't determine that.

Re: How I raised a $5.1M seed as a first-time, female, solo founder for a biotech co

#204

Post by enriquto »

lovetocode wrote: post #186
enriquto wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> toxically-positive This! That term that describes perfectly my impression of many people from the U.S.A. It's maybe just a cultural thing, but I have a lot of trouble working together with people who have this sort of attitude.

You must have not been to the USA recently. People here are incredibly disagreeable, especially in the last 5-10 years.

> People here are incredibly disagreeable, especially in the last 5-10 years.

Never been to the USA in the last 10 years, but I interact regularly with usians, and this is not my experience at all. All of them have been extremely nice people, without a trace of disagreeableness.

What irks me, is that they are constantly giving unwarranted and over the top praise. I find this very disturbing. In France this attitude is invariably interpreted as ironic mockery. And if they spoke French I would be genuinely offended by such attacks.

Re: How I raised a $5.1M seed as a first-time, female, solo founder for a biotech co

#205

Post by walterbell »

belorn wrote: post #203
walterbell wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are separate flags for comments and articles. At the time of erroneous article flagging, there were worthwhile comments on this article.

The important question is when the flagging occurred by the users. If the flagging occured when most comments were culture warring, and the moderators find that to be inappropriate, then it would be good to know for future reference. If most users pressed the flag button long after the discussion switched to be more productive then I can understand what dang is talking about, but from his post I can't determine that.

Is there a documented HN policy that high-quality articles can be censored on HN because of low-quality comments? Why not allow time for low-quality comments to be downvoted/flagged and high-quality comments to arrive? If good articles could be rapidly flagged/censored, how could discussions ever "switch to be more productive"?

Re: How I raised a $5.1M seed as a first-time, female, solo founder for a biotech co

#206

Post by bserge »

op03 wrote: post #161
doggodaddo78 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. I'm from the US grew up in the Valley but lived in the UK for a startup for a short while. It's both a byproduct of career hierarchal corporate obedience and social success façade (see also: modern campus culture of Ivy Leagues and Pac12s). It's absolutely awful for mental health or getting things done. More practically, it's a problem when people try so hard to be liked that they throw away respect by being too…

Very nice very nice as borat would say but the big piece missing in the rant is mindless ambition. Thats what keeps the lights on when shit hits the fan. Whether people are superficial corporate robots or without real friends or follow all kinds of meaningless ritual etc doesnt matter if they are driven. Why? Because thats who you end up relying on when competing against other people who are mindlessly driven. How ar…

It is possible to be driven without being overly emotional (whether positive or negative emotions). It's probably harder to master, though.

Re: How I raised a $5.1M seed as a first-time, female, solo founder for a biotech co

#207

Post by refurb »

ElFitz wrote: post #189
a_bonobo wrote: post #78

>It’s a VC’s job to keep the door open. Many were ‘blown away’, then passed before the second meeting. This is normal. I'm sometimes working with US-Americans and not being US-American myself, I feel like this is also a US-cultural thing? In important meetings with US stakeholders I struggle to read the room because everything is always 'awesome' and 'amazing', there's rarely upfront criticism. Honest feedback has to…

Here, in France, we have a very different take. Everything is crap. By default. Almost everything is "not bad", "fine", or at best "pretty good". You will almost never hear a French person describe anything as "awesome", "great", "fantastic" or "brilliant" (unless they’ve spent too much time in the US or work in startup la la land). But crap also is "not bad", "fine", or sometimes even "pretty good". So, how does one…

Yup. The flip side isn’t all that much better. Been there too.

As another post said, ignore everything said, the only thing that matters is when their money hits your account.

Re: How I raised a $5.1M seed as a first-time, female, solo founder for a biotech co

#208

Post by refurb »

ipsum2 wrote: post #105
dang wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would be a good comment if not for the word "just", which makes it sound like a shallow dismissal. (" Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something. " - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html ) The link to relevant other work is most welcome, of course.

"Just", because the blog post sounds like it was doing fundamental basic research on longevity based on brand new ideas ("I was chatting with some friends about how I thought I had an idea for how to make dogs live longer."), instead of commercializing on existing research. It wasn't my intention to be dismissive.

I think your comment is fine. One could read it and be like “wow! Are they running a lab too?” and once you find out this person role is really connecting the money to this preexisting science, the term “just” is warranted. It’s not negative, it’s a recognition that they aren’t running their own lab as well.

Re: How I raised a $5.1M seed as a first-time, female, solo founder for a biotech co

#209

Post by drited »

EU based startups led by female CEOs may be interested to know that the EIC Accelerator program aims to fund a portfolio of companies with at least 35% led by women.

At interview stage gender balance is a factor in prioritization with companies with female CEOs being prioritised until 40% of invited companies have female CEOs.

Source:https://eic.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-03/EIC%20Work%20P...

Re: How I raised a $5.1M seed as a first-time, female, solo founder for a biotech co

#210

Post by xiphias2 »

biztos wrote: post #192
xiphias2 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but at least honest. I prefer honest over a person hiding something / not telling the truth (she was hiding much more about the science part, that it’s rapamicyn that she’s testing).

> I […] did not discover the science behind the company. It doesn’t seem like she was hiding anything, in fact that’s a pretty bold admission in an article about raising VC.

I was interested in their pipeline on their home page, and all I see is LOY-001 and LOY-002:

https://loyalfordogs.com/the-science/pipeline-current-studie...

New names are usually given to new, unknown compounds where a company spent years on getting the compound right and tested thousands of them to select the best (using a criteria that the company publishes)

Post reply on HN