Live data from Hacker News

Sell for half a billion and get nothing (2021)

fundablestartups.com

51–60 of 334 posts

Re: Sell for half a billion and get nothing (2021)

#51
post #6

Liq prefs vanished during the ZIRP and I haven’t seen them return…yet. But the founders do have some leverage. If there is no incentive to do the deal they can just… not cause the deal to happen (different from blocking it, just not working on it). This is the same reasons you see big pay packets for the execs when a company is doing poorly or is bankrupt: otherwise they could just go do something else (get a differe…

maybe in Silicon Valley, but in New England and other less mature markets nothing has ever changed feel free to change my view, for anyone passing by

I’ve only started companies in Silicon Valley (not even in SF once it started to get tech too) but have been on board in NY, Cambridge MA, and Europe.

As a broad generalization: investors in Northern California are more afraid of missing out on the upside than losing some in the downside. The further east you go the more risk averse they get, until by the time you get to Europe the terms tend to be quite abusive because the investors are so worried about losing their money.

Re: Sell for half a billion and get nothing (2021)

#53
post #6

Liq prefs vanished during the ZIRP and I haven’t seen them return…yet. But the founders do have some leverage. If there is no incentive to do the deal they can just… not cause the deal to happen (different from blocking it, just not working on it). This is the same reasons you see big pay packets for the execs when a company is doing poorly or is bankrupt: otherwise they could just go do something else (get a differe…

[deleted]

Re: Sell for half a billion and get nothing (2021)

#55
post #39
post #6

Liq prefs vanished during the ZIRP and I haven’t seen them return…yet. But the founders do have some leverage. If there is no incentive to do the deal they can just… not cause the deal to happen (different from blocking it, just not working on it). This is the same reasons you see big pay packets for the execs when a company is doing poorly or is bankrupt: otherwise they could just go do something else (get a differe…

If you're on really shitty acquisition terms like this, to the point where you are getting no payout for your hard work, one way you can get a small payout is to negotiate your employment contract with the new parent company to be very, very good. Make sure they give you and all employees a nice big sign on bonus and salary. They can deduct that from the proposed acquisition price. Is it ethical? I say yes, you shoul…

You can also get a carve-out of the deal proceeds.

Re: Sell for half a billion and get nothing (2021)

#56

I have a friend that has given up on options. Even if he were to be #10 somewhere he would take any extra pay over any options. Stories like this show the wisdom of that. Are there really that many success stories for people other than for VCs and (maybe) founders out there anymore? Even if your options (eventually) get you 200k, how much did they cost you in years of lower pay. Even with a payout, considering intere…

It's not just your friend: a lot of people have given up on options. Obviously they're underrepresented here on HN because this is a startup-focused forum, but I know many, many people who have concluded "options have an EV of zero, startups pay options in lieu of market-rate salary, therefore startups are a raw deal; I will only go to FAANGs". They're sort of a dark matter universe since they are only visible in the…

I guess this is why worker-coop would never really take off. Most people are not in position to be paid in possible future profit rather than direct compensation. There's also nothing stopping employees at a public company to convert their entire salary into stock but not many do that either.

Re: Sell for half a billion and get nothing (2021)

#57

I’ve always wondered what it means to be a “founder” when it is done with everyone else’s money. Are they not just effectively employees at that point? I fear such abuse of such just feeds a narcissistic species that focuses mainly on executive headshots and snazzy websites. Too many startup websites scream, “look, we have a website, $$$ millions, and an executive board — we’re all grown up now!” without actually hav…

They are just employees on some level, but they are also typically owners with a lot of risk on the table themselves. Even if they come in with what would be “a lot” of money to most of us, it can’t compete with investment capital.

We build energy plants with investor money as an example. They don’t invest in us, but into the projects we run, so it’s a little bit different than having someone invest in us (but I’ll get to that). We don’t solely build a power plant with investor money though, we build it with a mix of investor money, loans and our own money, and that last bit just got a whole lot larger (meaning we can do much larger projects) with private equity investing into us directly. So now instead of doing a tiny mom-and-pops sort of solar plant, we can build some of the largest solar plants in the world. The payout on the other side isn’t linear either, there is much, much, more money in a single large plant than in a hundred tiny plants. Especially when you sell the product a few years after its completion.

In the current world, maybe it would’ve been better to not take private equity on board, but at the time it was done, nobody knew Putin would invade, that the global supply lines and manufacturing power would never recover from covid, or, that interest rates would go above 15% in countries where they were below 1%. Everyone knew the low interest rates wouldn’t stay, but we sure didn’t expect them to go so far above 8%.

Anyway, even if the world hadn’t gone to shit, our company would still have been 10-20 people and not in the hundreds if we hadn’t acquired the massive amount of funds. Since while our founders are rather rich, they aren’t that rich, and this would’ve limited the company growth to such a significant degree that even two years of economic turmoil has us at a level we would’ve likely never reached. It’s not all gloom and doom either, people still need power after all.

So you’re both right and wrong, founders sort of become employees, but not really. How much they lean toward the employee “title” typically depends on their deals.

Re: Sell for half a billion and get nothing (2021)

#59

I am currently working with a start-up where the company is incapable of meeting its capex obligations. The founder raised a good amount of capital from investors a few years ago, and that provided a decent runway, but there's no traction, no KPIs, and whilst we've built some impressive technology, impressive technology does not bring in revenue. One of the problems (amongst many) is that the primary stakeholder has…

> "Can I see the cap table?" - "Can I see the terms of the investors?"

These questions should become so normalized that founders don’t bat an eye at it. If I am an early employee, we are partners. Wanting to know my percentage and the company’s liabilities before I sign is not unreasonable. I also want to hear you talk convincingly about your plans for future investment.

Re: Sell for half a billion and get nothing (2021)

#60
post #17
post #4

If you can’t find investors who will invest at 1x preference, it’s a sign that you should seriously consider shutting down rather than raising more funding.

What you say sounds reasonable. Can you provide any anecdotal evidence or case study that would make your comment less random-dude-on-HN-said-this and more grounded in fact/evidence. Edit: I mean specifically something like this article that was linked in another comment on this thread, https://medium.com/@andrewkemendo/first-time-founders-and-th... Just to help ground what you suggest in your comment to something co…

I think that the idea is that if you need (operative word) to buy one dollar for two dollars (not exactly the scenario, but imo the analogy works), then your business probably sucks. This is true more often than it is false. Basically, you're betting the one dollar will turn into 2+ dollars, but by that point the business model should've already been proven.
Post reply on HN