Hacker News Reader

Angel funding, on the other hand, generally comes without strings. If you take $1M of convertible debt, you don't have to give up a board seat, special rights, etc. If you do it right, you get some runway and some awesome advisors. That's it.

Pros and cons, of course, but VC funding (especially when the VC gets to set the terms) is a world apart from angel funding.

View on HN

Isn't that no-strings angel funding predicated on the idea that there's going to be either a round of financing or an exit?

I have no problems with angel funding (I'm really not all that familiar with it; no company I've been involved with has taken "angel money"), but I do have concerns about any company model that puts first-time founders on a burn-rate runway. There are less perilous ways to build a business.

Isn't that no-strings angel funding predicated on the idea that there's going to be either a round of financing or an exit?

Really depends on the investor. Some angels explicitly want you to go Series A -> Series B -> $100M -> IPO. Others explicitly want to help founders start cool companies. Some are basically mini-VCs, and others are really founder-friendly. So it's just important for a startup to have the right angels, whichever direction you go.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com