TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Paul Graham's Letter to YC Companies

645 pointsby emilepetronealmost 13 years ago
Jessica and I had dinner recently with a prominent investor. He seemed sure the bad performance of the Facebook IPO will hurt the funding market for earlier stage startups. But no one knows yet how much. Possibly only a little. Possibly a lot, if it becomes a vicious circle.<p>What does this mean for you? If it means new startups raise their first money on worse terms than they would have a few months ago, that's not the end of the world, because by historical standards valuations had been high. Airbnb and Dropbox prove you can raise money at a fraction of recent valuations and do just fine. What I do worry about is (a) it may be harder to raise money at all, regardless of price and (b) that companies that previously raised money at high valuations will now face "down rounds," which can be damaging.<p>What to do?<p>If you haven't raised money yet, lower your expectations for fundraising. How much should you lower them? We don't know yet how hard it will be to raise money or what will happen to valuations for those who do. Which means it's more important than ever to be flexible about the valuation you expect and the amount you want to raise (which, odd as it may seem, are connected). First talk to investors about whether they want to invest at all, then negotiate price.<p>If you raised money on a convertible note with a high cap, you may be about to get an illustration of the difference between a valuation cap on a note and an actual valuation. I.e. when you do raise an equity round, the valuation may be below the cap. I don't think this is a problem, except for the possibility that your previous high cap will cause the round to seem to potential investors like a down one. If that's a problem, the solution is not to emphasize that number in conversations with potential investors in an equity round.<p>If you raised money in an equity round at a high valuation, you may find that if you need money you can only get it at a lower one. Which is bad, because "down rounds" not only dilute you horribly, but make you seem and perhaps even feel like damaged goods.<p>The best solution is not to need money. The less you need investor money, (a) the more investors like you, in all markets, and (b) the less you're harmed by bad markets.<p>I often tell startups after raising money that they should act as if it's the last they're ever going to get. In the past that has been a useful heuristic, because doing that is the best way to ensure it's easy to raise more. But if the funding market tanks, it's going to be more than a heuristic.<p>The startups that really get hosed are going to be the ones that have easy money built into the structure of their company: the ones that raise a lot on easy terms, and are then led thereby to spend a lot, and to pay little attention to profitability. That kind of startup gets destroyed when markets tighten up. So don't be that startup. If you've raised a lot, don't spend it; not merely for the obvious reason that you'll run out faster, but because it will turn you into the wrong sort of company to thrive in bad times.<p>--pg

55 comments

pgalmost 13 years ago
Note incidentally that I'm talking about the performance of the IPO, not the performance of Facebook itself. I think Facebook as a company is in a strong position. The problem is simply that Mr. Market (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Intelligent_Investor" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Intelligent_Investor</a>) doesn't think so at the moment.
评论 #4068751 未加载
评论 #4067428 未加载
评论 #4067980 未加载
评论 #4067418 未加载
评论 #4074219 未加载
评论 #4069968 未加载
评论 #4068164 未加载
评论 #4067766 未加载
评论 #4067450 未加载
9oliYQjPalmost 13 years ago
It's very possible that the Facebook IPO came early enough in this bubble to actually prevent a huge disaster. I did not like where things were headed with most startups in the past couple of years. The Facebook IPO was like a fire extinguisher that happened to contain a small fire before it got way too out-of-control.<p>If your startup has no business model, you better think of one fast. If your startup has no revenue or a lack of it, you better start generating a lot more really soon. If your startup has a solid business model and is cash-flow positive, it's time to start leap-frogging the competition and adjusting the course. This is the time when good companies become great ones.
ericfrenkielalmost 13 years ago
I read this with a heavy heart, especially after working at Facebook before my current startup.<p>Facebook is an amazing company with some of the best people in Silicon Valley working to make Facebook a once-in-a-generation company.<p>But if Google debuted at $25b, and grew into a $200b company, how can Facebook grow by a similar multiple starting at a $100b valuation?<p>In my opinion, opening at $38/share sucked all the oxygen out of the room, in the IPO market, especially the later stage market, and potentially downstream as well.<p>Instead of debuting at $50b or even $75b, the delta was the price of the collective hope of entrepreneurs and early stage startups everywhere.<p>Because at the end of the day many investors will ask, "If even Facebook couldn't do it, who can?"<p>The price of leaving a little money on the table for most retail investors would have been worth the good will and Facebook's reputation. Because Facebook really is a great company that is doing and will continue to do great things, but PG is saying the air is gone, and no one knows if more will come.<p>Is all this a bad thing? Perhaps more companies should be valued based on revenue in stead of API calls/month etc.
评论 #4067825 未加载
评论 #4067472 未加载
评论 #4068065 未加载
Smerityalmost 13 years ago
To those having fun saying "pop", contribute value not onomatopoeia.<p>The clearest message in PG's letter is simply "The startups that really get hosed are going to be the ones that have easy money ... So don't be that startup."<p>If you have a viable business then you can either a) proceed without venture capital or b) prove yourselves enough that you'll get the terms you need. Yes, (a) may make you move slower, and (b) means that potentially brilliant ideas that have a bright side just past the edge of horizon are more difficult to get off the ground, but this has always been the case.<p>One of my mentors always quotes "you don't know the value of your captain until you hit turbulent waters". These are our turbulent waters. For those of you ready for it, this is a time of opportunity.
评论 #4067531 未加载
jayzeealmost 13 years ago
So here is an idea for an email feature/gmail plugin: 'Semantic Scramble' Basically, any sensitive email that you send to a bunch of people is automatically scrambled (retaining original meaning/correct grammar, just a small shuffling of words) so that each person gets a unique email. Easy to find out who leaked it. You could add a similar unique jitter for sensitive photos/images...
评论 #4067462 未加载
评论 #4067484 未加载
评论 #4067473 未加载
评论 #4067438 未加载
评论 #4067430 未加载
评论 #4069612 未加载
cdixonalmost 13 years ago
This happens every couple of years in tech. I've personally witnessed 3 downturns now. One was real and two were arguably the best time to start companies. Raising money might be harder, but generally only for bad companies.
评论 #4067444 未加载
评论 #4067414 未加载
评论 #4067415 未加载
pbiggaralmost 13 years ago
When I saw PG's email, I thought this was a self-fulfilling prophesy, even if it was only seen by YC founders. But now that every has seen it - it will be in Forbes and TechCrunch soon no doubt - it seems almost certain.<p>If just YC founders see it, then they'll take less money, and get lower valuations, etc, leading the tone of the valley. But if everyone sees it, investors will close their wallets, people will declare the bubble is now popped, and the prophesy will fulfil itself.
评论 #4069567 未加载
评论 #4067759 未加载
评论 #4067815 未加载
zinssmeisteralmost 13 years ago
I am not sure what will cool the investment climate more. The fact that facebook's IPO was a disaster or that PG sent this letter and recommends to be cautious.
评论 #4067334 未加载
评论 #4068822 未加载
srousseyalmost 13 years ago
Facebook waited too long. Part of the psychology on joe public's love of Apple has to do with APPL -- they got to invest in the stock while investing their time (and $) in their products.<p>Facebook decided to have all that growth in value for insiders only. And it's not like they wanted to be a private company, so the outcome is planned.<p>By not leaving any money on the table, and having joe public not share and invest in their success, when the government starts to beat down on them, there won't be much public support for FB.<p>And pg is right: nor will there be much support for those following in their footsteps. Scorched Earth. Those investors did well (and many HN peeps on SecondMarket). So well in fact, it won't happen again. Not for a long while.
评论 #4067620 未加载
hsureshalmost 13 years ago
Bubble 1.0 - Just have a prototype, and money will follow you.<p>Bubble 2.0 - Ship a product, make sure you have enough users, and money will follow you.<p>Post this bubble, is it going to be: "Make profits, because that is where your money is"?<p>I am not implying bubble as a bad thing, fwiw.<p>edit: grammar
andralmost 13 years ago
Am I the only one thinking that Facebook's IPO was actually a success? The point of the IPO is to sell your company shares at the best possible price and Facebook did it.<p>Compare to an A/B/C round for a startup. If you know investors are willing to pay $50m for the round, but you settle for $25m, then you just lost $25m and gained nothing.<p>I think the main reason FB is falling now, is not because the stock was not worth $38, but everyone that expected it to quadruple overnight is now selling.
评论 #4068556 未加载
gojomoalmost 13 years ago
The FB IPO sends a signal that certain exits are about 35% less lucrative than the most enthusiastic might have thought. And, the IPO wasn't the 'starter pistol' for another frenzy. I think the memory of 12 years ago hasn't faded entirely yet, and there's so much other uncertainty in the economic world no one can be a runaway optimist.<p>But the IPO results might actually boost certain kinds of deals. For example, would you rather sell your company to FB for $X million of FB stock when that stock is at 45 or when it's at 26? (Of course X is larger when FB is flush, but I doubt X goes down linearly with FB market-cap when there are other bidders. And psychologically, it may be easier to think FB grows 50% back into its peak, than 50% more above its peak.)<p>If there had been an indiscriminate frenzy, everyone knows that ends in a crash. When everyone's instead been reminded that companies are different -- FB isn't GPRN isn't AAPL isn't LNKD -- and the particulars of value and model matter, that's better for a sustained boom at a more measured pace.
_piusalmost 13 years ago
This will probably be a self-fulfilling prophecy.
JustNickalmost 13 years ago
"The best solution is not to need money."<p>This always is a good rule for any kind of business. not only about startups.<p>Paul, you're trying to explain basics of business processes.<p>In YC application, Faq there is an item in which you're asking to state is there any programmers in startup team, and explaining that if not, you better should have one. I think you should add one more item, on which YC team should have experienced and successful project manager, businessman who make startup profitable and successful.
gfodoralmost 13 years ago
I am confused why the FB IPO is considered anything other than a failure of bankers to price the stock correctly. Did anyone who actually understands Facebook's business today expect it to maintain a 100B valuation? Did any institutional investors throw money into it hoping it would rise up to 150B? If you invested in Facebook at the 150 P/E or whatever absurd value it was you deserved to get burned and hopefully are not investing in startups.
NichCarlsonalmost 13 years ago
I note that BI is called a "cesspool" in these comments, and that this email has been posted here so that you don't have to send any traffic to us.<p>Just so everyone is aware, you'd not be reading this email right now if us cesspool-splashers hadn't done the hard work of getting a copy and posting it. Now, by not linking to us, you are essentially punishing us for that work. I suppose you'd prefer a world in which you hadn't read this email.
paulsutteralmost 13 years ago
The problems in Europe are a more severe weight on the market (whether generally or for tech stocks specifically). By any rational logic, the Facebook IPO went well:<p>- the company raised a lot of money at a good price,<p>- the company remains valued at a high multiple (ie, even today valued on the dream not on the numbers), and<p>- I can imagine no better antidote for bubble muppets than the performance of the IPO<p>Bubbles can be fun but they're not healthy. Recent events are far better than a crash. It's just a correction. The emotional hand-wringing will last about as long as it always does, and be forgotten just as it always is.<p>Events in Europe may turn out much more severe than the minor impact to date. And they may not. But that's a bigger concern than the over-valuation of social companies.
capdizalmost 13 years ago
"The best solution is to not need money. The less you need investor money, the more investors like you". That's true if you are dropbox, airbnb and other startups that have a solid revenue avenues other than advertising. If twitter or facebook itself had been founded after that disastrous ipo (facebook ipo) they would be in a worse position than dropbox or airbnb in terms of funding and revenue. That said, i think facebook will get to its intended valuation within this year.
评论 #4067563 未加载
dm8almost 13 years ago
With the risk of getting downvoted; why this letter was made to public? I think it was meant for YC companies only. FB IPO has nothing to do with early stage investing. It may be a good thing that IPO didn't pop. We've averted a major bubble. But making this letter public made situation even worse. Now all the investors will rethink their investments. Why? Because PG (of all the investors) has said it will be hard to raise money.<p>And expect Business Insiders, Venture Beats of the world to spread doom and gloom. After all it will attract more eyeballs. RIP good times indeed.<p>Edit: grammar and minor changes
limeadealmost 13 years ago
Can someone explain the perception that Facebook's IPO was a disaster? Doesn't the fact that the stock has not risen mean that the offering had the correct price?
评论 #4067492 未加载
评论 #4067760 未加载
dr_almost 13 years ago
Interesting but Facebook was absurdly valued to begin with. At nearly 100 times earnings, it seems to me that Mr. Market actually responded appropriately for now.<p>Facebook has already been monetizing using traditional revenue streams (ads) and there doesn't appear to be much left to do there.<p>They may have another ace up their sleeve, but it's not Wall Streets job to guess that they may.
jmspringalmost 13 years ago
I have been mixed on this, and I think it will have an interesting impact on the IPO markets.<p>But, one area that I am still waiting to see play out is the intersection of secondary markets and IPOs. People have raised the examples of Groupon, Yelp, and FB (Zynga is another that comes to mind). All social, yet all different. Groupon has had some interesting accounting practices along the way, FB was richly priced by the secondary markets.<p>I have yet to see any big name, non-social, companies really test the markets, and I mean when they are in a position to do so -- strong product, strong revenues, and strong path moving forward.<p>Given what is happening in Europe and the world markets in general, there will be an impact on investment.<p>There have been basically 3 downturns (as I believe cdixon mentioned) in the last 12 years, is this the 4th? Or is this a by product of new avenues like the secondary market?<p>I have no idea, but it will be interesting to see how it plays out.
评论 #4071760 未加载
silentehalmost 13 years ago
This is not necessarily a bad thing for the new startups, in my opinion. I want to quote PG from his essay: The top idea in your mind (my favorite one btw)<p>{...} I'd noticed startups got way less done when they started raising money, but it was not till we ourselves raised money that I understood why. The problem is not the actual time it takes to meet with investors. The problem is that once you start raising money, raising money becomes the top idea in your mind. That becomes what you think about when you take a shower in the morning. And that means other questions aren't. {...}<p>This is actually how it works, and more or less always worked here in Europe. No investments, no money raising, only part of your daily job salary invested in your startup ideas, and endless nights learning, coding, failing in a loop....till you succeed and you start to make money.
cpercivaalmost 13 years ago
<i>because "down rounds" not only dilute you horribly...</i><p>I'm missing something here. What makes "down rounds" so dilutive? I'm assuming we're talking about a larger effect than the obvious "lower valuation = handing over more stock to raise the same amount of cash" effect.
评论 #4067539 未加载
评论 #4067530 未加载
评论 #4067554 未加载
评论 #4067540 未加载
nhangenalmost 13 years ago
I think this is a good thing, as startup valuations are already frothy, especially when based on users instead of earnings.<p>Perhaps this is what's needed to bring the game back to reality so that everyone can prosper.
scootnetworksalmost 13 years ago
Asserting that the decline in Facebook's stock price post-IPO has generalizable implications for early stage companies is helping the tail to wag the dog.<p>I agree with Fred Wilson that Facebook's present valuation should be a thrill to its early investors, not a chill <a href="http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2012/06/some-perspective.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2012/06/some-perspective.html</a>.<p>It is natural to see personal meaning in well known events. Venus is passing in front of the Sun right now. Seems like a good time to call some investors.
bootloadalmost 13 years ago
<i>"... But no one knows yet how much. Possibly only a little. Possibly a lot, if it becomes a vicious circle. ..."</i><p>The email is counter-intuitive because being truthful and signalling a possible crunch speeds up the observation. It also gets you trampled as the herd looks at the lead changing directions ~ <a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4067278" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4067278</a> but it also forces teams to <i>'adapt'</i> quickly.
heuristoalmost 13 years ago
FB is a healthy message. Before the IPO it has been noted that late-stage financings were feeling out of control in terms of valuation. BDC-based funds have sprung up to "invest" in the "pop" but don't really help build companies directly.<p>Smaller, more focused rounds at lower valuations are probably a good thing. So is using sites like kickstarter to generate funded ramps for new products.<p>The more capital efficient you can be the better.
abnergalmost 13 years ago
Late to this thread, but I posted this on May 31:<p>Facebook: Did they just pop the bubble and screw twitter?<p><a href="http://abnerg.tumblr.com/post/24119345098/facebook-did-they-just-pop-the-bubble-screw-twitter" rel="nofollow">http://abnerg.tumblr.com/post/24119345098/facebook-did-they-...</a><p>Two outstanding questions: 1. Can we be done with the advertizing business models please? 2. How much did the Facebook IPO really shift the private equity market?
tomasienalmost 13 years ago
I spend so much time arguing and thinking critically about things that I've made a decision: I'm just not going to question Paul Graham. It's not worth my time, he's right enough where it's probably not dangerous and let's be honest: we all need something solid to lean on. I've realized I've leaned so heavily on his advice up to this point, so I'm just going all in.
timlindinctalmost 13 years ago
Isn't it a bit early for someone like pg to be calling this?<p>Calling it publicly essentially creates the effect, especially from an accelerator lead.
评论 #4068071 未加载
lpolovetsalmost 13 years ago
To play Devil's advocate for a moment, Facebook's IPO will also create a bunch of millionaires, some of whom will want to become angel investors. So it might become harder to raise money from VCs but easier to raise it from angels because the rising supply of angels will counteract the tightening market.
kruipenalmost 13 years ago
So FB clusterfuck of an IPO might end up being really good for them because now it will be much easier to hire...
joshfraseralmost 13 years ago
Many of the people I know at Facebook are talking about getting into Angel investing or starting their own companies now that they have money. I'm most worried about all that seed money flooding the market, making it even harder for existing companies to find good talent.
Tichyalmost 13 years ago
Isn't it the case that there simply is too much money and at the end of the day, people seem to be desperate to invest it somewhere? I think that is a reason why most stock market crises don't seem to last very long.
elomarnsalmost 13 years ago
"The best solution is not to need money". Best advice on this post.
damienhalmost 13 years ago
As wise as a Warren Buffett letter to shareholders. Thanks, Paul.
rshloalmost 13 years ago
Or just don't raise money and bootstrap from the ground's up.
jpcoricaalmost 13 years ago
In argentina there's almost not other way. BTW MG Sielge wrote about the FB IPO and said it was bad for short sight bankers but good for FB, is he wrong?
huetschalmost 13 years ago
Did you hesitate before sending this out due to the fear that such a letter might itself push the market closer towards a vicious cycle?
rexreedalmost 13 years ago
Thank goodness. Now maybe it just might be a bit easier to find some developer talent now that the easy money faucet has turned off.
CUR10USalmost 13 years ago
"The best solution is not to need money."<p>"The startups that really get hosed are going to be the ones... that pay little attention to profitability."
sameerp1almost 13 years ago
A post like this probably only helps push along the vicious cycle :) Not saying it shouldn't have been posted, but it's ironic.
Nikkkialmost 13 years ago
PG's message sounds too alarmist. Facebook has a huge impact on the tech ecosystem, but FB's impact is I reckon overrated.
rubyPLAYWITHMEalmost 13 years ago
Who is emilepetrone? Did pg really write this?<p>Also why did this disappear from the front page, and then reappear?
评论 #4067421 未加载
评论 #4067389 未加载
评论 #4067390 未加载
jermainkalmost 13 years ago
I'm sure the Facebook IPO will hit seed/early stage funding less than the SF housing market :)
tloganalmost 13 years ago
I think only problem is that we again got into 2000-dot-com thinking that "users == money".
notbitteralmost 13 years ago
Founder shares get diluted in a down round, but employee options go completely underwater.
VentureChrisalmost 13 years ago
how obvious this post. It just tells we're screwed now by the bad facebook ipo and find a business model fast. Now the party is not over but the drinks are getting fewer and the music gets silent. Cheers, Chris.
dwyningsalmost 13 years ago
R.I.P. Good Times 2.0
评论 #4067397 未加载
wilschroteralmost 13 years ago
I think this advice is useful in just about all times.
felipepiresxalmost 13 years ago
word up pg. Let the winter come and lets see who can ski.
lightyrsalmost 13 years ago
This seems ethically dubious.
评论 #4068608 未加载
dmvaldmanalmost 13 years ago
Did I hear a bubble just pop?
评论 #4067525 未加载
markmmalmost 13 years ago
I'm sure Peter Thiel wishes he could go back in time and not invest anything in Facebook, he only turned 500k into over a billion, but if the IPO went better he could have made it to 1.5 billion. I agree all those investors that might have invested in startups will be less inclined because of this. Who wants a measly billion when you could have 1.5 billion!!???