6 ms·

I'm in a startup, and we are (somewhat lazily) trying to do Series A fundraising. We _are_ a company that has AI as a part of our app, but not an LLM company.

by cyberax 13d ago

I'm in a startup, and we are (somewhat lazily) trying to do Series A fundraising. We _are_ a company that has AI as a part of our app, but not an LLM company. The advice from our early investors was to basically overhype ourselves, telling that we can transform the world overnight. And also to remove any mentions of our _actual_ product that has real paying users because it can muddy the grand vision. Another hot thing in the startup world is what I'm calling the "vibe income". It's potential income from a signed MOU or contingent on the success of some trial. So we have to compete with companies saying that they're already having $500k in "income" after just a few months. We naïvely thought that our GAAP income is more important. I have really bad feelings about this whole situation.

TheOtherHobbes 13d ago
Most of the industry is running on bullshit. The concept of running a productive service that meets genuine user needs in a clever, delightful, and satisfying way has been replaced by grifting, scamming, hyping, manipulating, and outright lying - a headless chicken voodoo dance to attract moar moneyz and worship the blind, idiot god Number Go Up.
claytongulick 13d ago
I have so many thoughts about this, I'm not sure where to start. Doing a raise has always been weird, there are lots of things that impact it, and different players in PE have totally different theses and motivations. As a founder, finding the right investment partner has always been one of the most important and difficult things. As a rule of thumb, I recommend to founders that only about 50% of the value of the investor is their cash investment. In many cases, less than that. The things that are at least as important are their advisors (who open doors for you), their portfolio companies that can partner with you, and the alignment of their thesis and worldview. I don't see any of that as having really changed much recently, other than a tightnening of capital for non-AI companies, but I suspect we're going to see a big shift there over the next 18-24 months, as the pressure from the LPs to deploy stays the same, but fingers get burnt from this bubble. Also, don't forget family offices and industry VCs (Optum Ventures, etc...) that have a lot of these features built in to their structure, not just the fund.
- cyberax 13d ago
  It's not our first fundraise, and not our first startup. But something _is_ distinctly different this time. People are no longer willing to wait for years and are betting on nebulous claims in hopes of a huge payout. And I feel that this goes far beyond the usual VC risk-taking.
  - claytongulick 13d ago
    Interesting, I'm curious about the changes - I know AI has drawn most of the pump & dump sharks, just like crypto before it, but there were always a set of responsible holdouts that resisted fad-tech for real value opportunities. Are you seeing a difference there?
    - cyberax 13d ago
      Yes, we are working with responsible VCs: endowments and large well-established companies in the field. It's as if the whole industry is suffering from a high fever. This is purely my personal vibe, perhaps others might chime in with their subjective opinions.
      - estearum 13d ago
        Also a founder raising currently and big +1. VCs are off their fucking rockers. Mad FOMO, listening to, believing, and benchmarking against actual liars (both obvious and non-obvious).
        claytongulick 13d ago
        Is it different than the crypto days? I was part of a couple raises back then and I remember every founder was being forced to find some blockchain application, no matter how inappropriate, to get any attention from the fad-tech VCs
        estearum 12d ago
grebc 13d ago
You’re better off bootstrapping/self-funding and just being a humble old business, not a startup.
rexreed 13d ago
Don't take any sort of business advice from VCs. They aren't even competent at running their own business, which is a financial play, not an operational business building and selling products or services. 90% of VC firms don't provide a net positive return to their own investors. That should tell you something. Their advice is self-serving to help inflate your equity value and has nothing to do with your current or future business.

by cyberax 13d ago

TheOtherHobbes 13d ago

Most of the industry is running on bullshit. The concept of running a productive service that meets genuine user needs in a clever, delightful, and satisfying way has been replaced by grifting, scamming, hyping, manipulating, and outright lying - a headless chicken voodoo dance to attract moar moneyz and worship the blind, idiot god Number Go Up.

claytongulick 13d ago

I have so many thoughts about this, I'm not sure where to start. Doing a raise has always been weird, there are lots of things that impact it, and different players in PE have totally different theses and motivations. As a founder, finding the right investment partner has always been one of the most important and difficult things. As a rule of thumb, I recommend to founders that only about 50% of the value of the investor is their cash investment. In many cases, less than that. The things that are at least as important are their advisors (who open doors for you), their portfolio companies that can partner with you, and the alignment of their thesis and worldview. I don't see any of that as having really changed much recently, other than a tightnening of capital for non-AI companies, but I suspect we're going to see a big shift there over the next 18-24 months, as the pressure from the LPs to deploy stays the same, but fingers get burnt from this bubble. Also, don't forget family offices and industry VCs (Optum Ventures, etc...) that have a lot of these features built in to their structure, not just the fund.

cyberax 13d ago
It's not our first fundraise, and not our first startup. But something _is_ distinctly different this time. People are no longer willing to wait for years and are betting on nebulous claims in hopes of a huge payout. And I feel that this goes far beyond the usual VC risk-taking.
- claytongulick 13d ago
  Interesting, I'm curious about the changes - I know AI has drawn most of the pump & dump sharks, just like crypto before it, but there were always a set of responsible holdouts that resisted fad-tech for real value opportunities. Are you seeing a difference there?
  - cyberax 13d ago
    Yes, we are working with responsible VCs: endowments and large well-established companies in the field. It's as if the whole industry is suffering from a high fever. This is purely my personal vibe, perhaps others might chime in with their subjective opinions.
    - estearum 13d ago
      Also a founder raising currently and big +1. VCs are off their fucking rockers. Mad FOMO, listening to, believing, and benchmarking against actual liars (both obvious and non-obvious).
      - claytongulick 13d ago
        Is it different than the crypto days? I was part of a couple raises back then and I remember every founder was being forced to find some blockchain application, no matter how inappropriate, to get any attention from the fad-tech VCs
        estearum 12d ago

grebc 13d ago

You’re better off bootstrapping/self-funding and just being a humble old business, not a startup.

rexreed 13d ago

Don't take any sort of business advice from VCs. They aren't even competent at running their own business, which is a financial play, not an operational business building and selling products or services. 90% of VC firms don't provide a net positive return to their own investors. That should tell you something. Their advice is self-serving to help inflate your equity value and has nothing to do with your current or future business.