Sabitlenmiş Tweet

Essentially:
1. Founders aim for the big bucks because.. well why not? 🤑
2. If VCs like the idea, founders, and plan, they are willing to invest and oftentimes overvalue the company -- why? VCs are trying to make 50X to 100X on 1-2% of their investments
3. This overvaluation comes with very aggressive benchmarks for growth because the company is expected to "grow" into that large valuation
4. Founder / company cannot keep up with those milestones (oftentimes very unrealistic expectations) and cannot grow into that large valuation
5. Successive VCs say "no more additional money" because growth isn't fast enough to hit the large initial valuation
6. Company runs out of money because they aren't making enough to cover their current operating model and costs and they were relying on larger successive VC rounds to stay alive, which are no longer coming. This is where a company might do a "down round" to stay afloat, which causes them to have a lower valuation and depreciated stock value (employees really do not like this and sets a bad signal)
7. Eventually, founder is forced to sell the company for less than the actual invested amount
8. Investors get money first (albeit not their entire investment since it sold for a lot less than the initial valuation) -- (i.e. called liquidity preference.. or "order of who gets paid back") -- founders are last on this order.
9. Nothing is left for anyone else, including the founders.. founders get $0
10. VCs build this into their risk profile and are generally factoring that this will happen most of their investments -- it's a numbers game, but still not fun for the founders that find themselves in this situation
English
























