Hacker News Reader

Comment by GuiA | Hacker News Reader

You just summed up a big part of silicon valley. Everyone thinks it's written in the stars that they are the next billion dollar company; anything else is given the derogatory "lifestyle business".

It's just a silly game that people way above us are playing. When I left a failing startup (that could have had seen some success had it been less ambitious and raised less debt), the CTO told me: "the VCs have more money than we have time".

View on HN

I also worked for a company that got very serious acquisition interest in mid 8 figures, but the founders wanted a 9 figure company (and 1-2 weren't the first digits they had in mind either.) We swung for the bleachers, and went out of business.

I got the impression that most of VC simply look for multifold returns and they shun companies which can be successful in a limited way with moderate returns.

Years ago I pitched a VC with a working prototype and biz plan - actually was looking more for angel-level money (perhaps) - somewhere between $300-$500k, and I was projecting revenue (which would be mostly profits) of $5m/year within 4 years (aggressive growth by my estimation, but doable). No dice - they wanted to see numbers north of $20m/year for sizable exit before they'd be willing to put in.. $500k. Those numbers always struck me as insane, but have stuck with me (this was... 15 years ago perhaps now).

It's understandable why this would irritate you but worth remembering that the VC economics don't work out for reasonable-sized successes. The wins have to pay for the losses, and the win rate is something like 2 in 10.

Did you go through with the business? If so, did you end up reaching your goal?

No, ended up scrapping it. Not just because of that, but it was a small factor.

Agreed. Many investors too looking for revolutionary ideas or products rather than general usage products which has proven to be successful.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com