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.

How to Raise Money

538 pointsby oBeLxover 11 years ago

30 comments

pgover 11 years ago
Incidentally, this is the actual advice we give startups about fundraising at YC. This batch I finally wrote it all down, and the s2013 startups used it when raising money.
评论 #6400868 未加载
评论 #6401055 未加载
评论 #6400677 未加载
评论 #6400579 未加载
评论 #6401776 未加载
评论 #6402594 未加载
评论 #6405432 未加载
austenallredover 11 years ago
From my experience, one of the most important realizations of fundraising is that it&#x27;s an <i>enormous</i> mind game.<p>The hardest part of fundraising was getting the startup to a point where I actually believed in it. When I looked at our projections and where the company could go, I was no longer thinking, &quot;Yeah, if a miracle happens,&quot; but rather, &quot;It&#x27;ll be hard, but I really, really think we can do that. We just need some help to get there.&quot;<p>Fundraising was a relative cakewalk when I was no longer selling investors on our company; I was explaining to investors that we were taking off, and asking them if they&#x27;d like to jump on board.
评论 #6402883 未加载
koriover 11 years ago
Paul Graham on dating:<p>s&#x2F;investors&#x2F;women&#x2F; &amp;&amp; s&#x2F;investor&#x2F;woman&#x2F;<p>(works the other way too)<p>When you talk to women your m.o. should be breadth-first search, weighted by expected value. You should always talk to women in parallel rather than serially. You can&#x27;t afford the time it takes to talk to women serially, plus if you only talk to one woman at a time, they don&#x27;t have the pressure of other women to make them act. But you shouldn&#x27;t pay the same attention to every woman, because some are more promising prospects than others. The optimal solution is to talk to all potential women in parallel, but give higher priority to the more promising ones.
评论 #6400964 未加载
评论 #6401361 未加载
评论 #6401960 未加载
评论 #6401407 未加载
评论 #6401349 未加载
评论 #6400957 未加载
tomasienover 11 years ago
You&#x27;ll notice a common theme in this (excellent) piece: it&#x27;s for startups that have some reason to believe they can actually raise a bunch of money. Startups who have either sufficient demonstrable talent behind them, are growing in some interesting way, or some other form of validation.<p>If you can&#x27;t find some confidence that you&#x27;re in that group, find a way to delay fundraising: keep your job, do consulting, work on alternate revenue streams, whatever, because fundraising when you&#x27;re no in the group the bulk of this article applies to - trying to fundraise is hell. Not just hell like &quot;it&#x27;s really, really hard and frustrating&quot; but hell like you could actually lose yourself in it, like you could actually get destroyed by it.
评论 #6402154 未加载
cdixonover 11 years ago
I&#x27;d strongly recommend having a presentation in the pitch meeting. It helps control the flow of the meeting and ensure you cover all the important points.
saturdayplaceover 11 years ago
My favorite thing about these essays, is summarized by PG&#x27;s remark in this one: &quot;sorry, we think you&#x27;re great, but PG said startups shouldn&#x27;t ___, and since we&#x27;re new to fundraising, we feel like we have to play it safe.&quot;<p>The card it gives to inexperienced players. This whole thing feels like a way to even out the information asymmetry inherent in these transactions.
sfrjayover 11 years ago
Unsurprisingly, excellent advice phrased as succinctly as it could be for such an enormous topic.<p>I&#x27;m glad Paul Graham think that decks are on the way out, because they&#x27;re a ludicrous (or at least inefficient) way of understanding what a startup does. If you have a product, show me that. If you have financials, show me those. Otherwise it becomes a competition to see which companies can dedicate their design resources to make the prettiest deck, and which investors can do the math on your &#x27;30% growth&#x27; number to figure out that you&#x27;re growing from 3 to 4 users.<p>The advice about valuation is also great. I listened in on a conversation with very smart founders who are used to optimizing things, and they were super concerned about having a great pre-money valuation. It&#x27;s tempting to focus on it because it&#x27;s your only benchmark at a really stressful stage, but if things go badly it won&#x27;t matter, and if things go really well it... won&#x27;t matter either.
评论 #6401702 未加载
评论 #6401886 未加载
评论 #6402042 未加载
Felix21over 11 years ago
This couldn&#x27;t have come at a better time.<p>For the first time we have an investable business (revenue, growth, profits, big market, happy customers).<p>Just as we were thinking: how do we go about this? Do we even have the time?<p>Then such an informative article comes along.<p>Thanks a lot PG.
评论 #6401995 未加载
bryanhover 11 years ago
&gt; Being proud of how well you did at fundraising is like being proud of your college grades.<p>What a great line.
wpietriover 11 years ago
I&#x27;m sure I&#x27;m not the only one thinking back on some long-ago startup and thinking, &quot;Oh! Those assholes! I knew it!&quot;<p>Not that what PG says here is exactly news to me at this point, but his wide experience and resulting confidence is fantastic confirmation of things that I now know to suspect, but at the time seemed so reasonable. Oh, you don&#x27;t lead? Oh, you want to see just a little more progress? Well of course you do. And I, earnest nerd, took them at their word.
larrysover 11 years ago
This is interesting and contradicts a bit of &quot;disrupt&quot; meme:<p>&quot;You can&#x27;t trust your intuitions. I&#x27;m going to give you a set of rules here that will get you through this process if anything will. At certain moments you&#x27;ll be tempted to ignore them. So rule number zero is: these rules exist for a reason. You wouldn&#x27;t need a rule to keep you going in one direction if there weren&#x27;t powerful forces pushing you in another.&quot;<p>What this seems to be saying (to young people) is &quot;it&#x27;s ok to ignore what other older more experienced people say (or what established practices are) and try to disrupt in those situations because the guidelines and experience they have is bogus but I am telling you that my rules are right so just trust me&quot;.
评论 #6400688 未加载
YuriNiyazovover 11 years ago
Do investors read these essays? You&#x27;ve had some strong words for some of the types, e.g. &quot;contemptible subspecies of investor&quot;. Would any of them email you and say, hey man, f u?
评论 #6401179 未加载
评论 #6402413 未加载
agronaover 11 years ago
Forgive my ignorance, but what does it mean for a founder to be &quot;formidable&quot;?<p>e.g. in this context:<p>&gt; The founder who handles fundraising should be the CEO, who should in turn be the most formidable of the founders.
评论 #6401662 未加载
jacquesmover 11 years ago
For years I&#x27;ve been toying with making a start-up board game. This essay could easily serve as the basis for that.<p>Slight disagree with the line:<p>&quot;For example, if a reputable investor is willing to invest on a convertible note, using standard paperwork, that is either uncapped or capped at a good valuation, you can take that without having to think.&quot;<p>A good valuation means you&#x27;re going to have to think anyway and if you don&#x27;t need it you don&#x27;t need it so then you&#x27;re just going to have an obligation + temptation to use the funds. There is no such thing as &#x27;free money&#x27; and a convertible note is simply deferring a part of the process and you&#x27;ll need to take care of it sooner or later by going for funding (or paying back the loan). So if you are not sure if you are going to do a follow up round just yet I&#x27;d advise against getting a convertible loan, you now have a good chunk of the hassle of having an investor without having properly gone through the process required. Of course you could simply bank the money and pay back the loan if you are still of the same opinion later on but this rarely happens. It&#x27;s the start-up equivalent of easy credit card debt, and if the valuation turns out to be low you could end up regretting taking the money (for instance, you could lose control like this). Better to negotiate it when you&#x27;re strong or if you feel very secure about your future valuation.<p>Having seen a lot of this from the other side of the table quite a few of the passages strike me as extremely negative about investors, I&#x27;m sure Paul has a ton more experience than I do so this carries a lot of weight with me but I don&#x27;t recognize the behaviours he sketches with the investors that I normally work for. Maybe they are the exception (I&#x27;m sure they&#x27;d like to think that :) ), but I can&#x27;t imagine it is this black.<p>Investors look at the process of investing mostly as risk elimination, and as a second best as risk reduction by enumerating the risks. If an investors bails at the last moment (for instance after you&#x27;ve already agreed on terms) that would either reflect very bad on the investor, or more commonly on the party invested in. It&#x27;s not as clear-cut imo as it is sketched here that all start-ups are angelic and innocent and investors are all sharks to a man and employing dirty tactics to get you to sign on the dotted line.<p>Again, it&#x27;s clear on which side my bread is buttered but I simply wouldn&#x27;t work for investors deploying such tactics, but have yet to see this sort of behaviour in any VC of some stature. Otoh I&#x27;ve seen plenty of trickery by companies about to be invested in (and lots of good companies too).
评论 #6400898 未加载
评论 #6404214 未加载
mehuldesaiover 11 years ago
The article gives valuable insights into raising capital and the art of negotiation in this domain.<p>Overall, negotiation and funding could almost be expressed as a rule table. Certain heuristics and rules. Rather than flip flopping strategies on how to negotiate and deal with investors, I think it may be good to have a set of rules&#x2F;heuristics to follow and see if it leads to your goal. If it fails, alter it and see the result. Anyhow, thats what I intend to do for my company, GridCrowd.<p>For negotiation PG mentions that its may be ok to just admit your a noob or not knowledgeable on certain aspects of funding. I respectfully wonder if there is another stratedgy from what I&#x27;ve learnt in negotiations in the non-funding world?:<p>Negotiate from a perceived position of strength.<p>You don&#x27;t have to say your a noob, miss the detail and expose it if it becomes necessary. This way you may be able to attain more action on behalf of the investor moving through their process. The noob strategy allows them to indicate a process that could be tailored to their advantage. I don&#x27;t know investors, so its hard for me to understand their objectives and how they behave. I&#x27;ll re-read PGs advise again, he does have great credibility and wiseness so maybe I need more study on this strategy.
mattmaroonover 11 years ago
&quot;When everyone wants you, it&#x27;s hard not to let it go to your head. Especially if till recently no one wanted you. But restrain yourself.&quot;<p>Reminds me of a great quote from a family member. When my cousin&#x27;s son started playing football, my cousin told him &quot;the first time you get into the endzone, act like you&#x27;ve been there before&quot;.
zaguiosover 11 years ago
I have a question. Since I&#x27;m nowhere near the valley and the start-up community in my community might as well be non-existent, I was wondering how I might go about meeting and getting introductions to investors. Not being well connected with a very poor local community makes it hard for me to know where to start.
评论 #6401901 未加载
评论 #6402595 未加载
评论 #6402642 未加载
wellboyover 11 years ago
An interesting point here is arrogance towards investors. The art of &quot;arrogance&quot; is to be arrogant in what you are saying while being very kind and nice in the way you say it.<p>It&#x27;s very hard as a first time founder to mimic the arrogance that is natural for experienced founders. If you can do it, it&#x27;s great, if you can&#x27;t, it will burn your bridges and blacklist you.^^<p>If you can pull it off though, you&#x27;re the master. It&#x27;s the pinnacle of hustling, having nothing to offer but being as confident as the next Mark Zuckerberg.<p>So you&#x27;d need to be as confident as Mark Zuckerberg when he had $1M users when you only have 1000 users. However, that also only works if you intrinsically think of yourself as a very high-value individual and if you have worked for several on you to think that way. Otherwise, investors will quickly spot your fake.
lpolovetsover 11 years ago
There&#x27;s a lot of great advice in this post, and much of it rings true. Specifically, the following tidbits are true ~100% of the time in my limited experience:<p>- &quot;Investors will try to lure you into fundraising when you&#x27;re not. It&#x27;s great for them if they can, because they can thereby get a shot at you before everyone else.&quot;<p>- &quot;What investors would like to do, if they could, is wait. When a startup is only a few months old, every week that passes gives you significantly more information about them.&quot;<p>- &quot;Though you can focus on different plans when talking to different types of investors, you should on the whole err on the side of underestimating the amount you hope to raise.&quot;<p>- &quot;You will be in a much stronger position if your collection of plans includes one for raising zero dollars—i.e. if you can make it to profitability without raising any additional money.&quot;<p>- &quot;If you have multiple founders, pick one to handle fundraising so the other(s) can keep working on the company.&quot;<p>- &quot;It&#x27;s a mistake to behave arrogantly to investors.&quot; (I also think it&#x27;s a mistake for investors to behave arrogantly to founders)<p>That said, I wanted to comment on a few of the other points in this (awesome) essay:<p><i>&quot;To founders, the behavior of investors is often opaque—partly because their motivations are obscure, but partly because they deliberately mislead you.&quot;</i><p>That&#x27;s a strong statement. First, not all investors mislead -- many are honest people. Second, startups are also often guilty of misdirection, which doesn&#x27;t mean you shouldn&#x27;t call out shitty investors, but I do think you should call out both sides instead of making one side sound like the bad guy.<p><i>&quot;Do you have to be introduced? In phase 2, yes.&quot;</i><p>I think this is true 95% of the time, but it&#x27;s not 100% true. My partners and I get pitch decks emailed to us by random people. Most of the time the pitch decks are subpar, but I think that&#x27;s because not being able to get a real intro is a sign that your team&#x2F;idea&#x2F;traction&#x2F;something else is subpar. However, this is just a signal, and there is no rule - written or unwritten - that says &quot;if we don&#x27;t know the sender then the deck goes in the trash.&quot; If you email us something that falls within our thesis and looks promising, we&#x27;d love to talk to you.<p><i>&quot;Never leave a meeting with an investor without asking what happens next. What more do they need in order to decide?&quot;</i><p>This is great advice. Most founders we talk to already ask &quot;what&#x27;s next&quot; at the end of a meeting, but not all of them do.<p><i>&quot;And while most investors are influenced by how interested other investors are in you, there are some who have an explicit policy of only investing after other investors have. You can recognize this contemptible subspecies of investor because they often talk about &quot;leads.&quot;&quot;</i><p>I guess I&#x27;m one of the members of that contemptible subspecies. My partners and I are in the middle of raising a fund, but we were investing with our own money for the better part of this year. Our checks were too small to lead, but there were lots of startups that didn&#x27;t have terms. If you&#x27;re raising 1m on a 5m pre, then we don&#x27;t need a lead to invest. If you&#x27;re raising 1m-2m on a ??? pre, then we would prefer to wait to find out what ??? is. We&#x27;re not super valuation sensitive, so 7m vs 8m is fine, but there&#x27;s a big difference between a 6m pre and an 10m pre. What makes this more difficult is that founders will not reveal terms for obvious reasons. They can&#x27;t say, &quot;we&#x27;re going to be raising at a 6m-9m pre&quot; because that immediately shows that they would be willing to go to 6m. They may as well not mention 9m. So instead, they say something like, &quot;we&#x27;ll know terms once we get a lead.&quot; Okay, fine.. then we&#x27;ll wait for the lead. =)<p><i>&quot;Sometimes an investor will ask you to send them your deck and&#x2F;or executive summary before they decide whether to meet with you. I wouldn&#x27;t do that. It&#x27;s a sign they&#x27;re not really interested.&quot;</i><p>I&#x27;m surprised by this advice. As an investor, it saves everyone a ton of time when I can look at a deck before a meeting. I will sit down for 15-45 minutes before a meeting, go through deck, do some internet research, and think of questions I want to ask. This saves time because I can find out answers to the basic questions that I would ask in the deck, and then we can focus on more interesting questions and concerns during the meeting.
评论 #6401414 未加载
评论 #6403496 未加载
评论 #6402353 未加载
评论 #6401436 未加载
评论 #6401355 未加载
adamzernerover 11 years ago
Ask HN&#x2F;PG: This essay focuses on phase 2. What is the advice for phase 1?
评论 #6403346 未加载
photorizedover 11 years ago
&quot;How not to have to raise money&quot; should have been more useful to startups. Unfortunately, many have been conditioned into thinking that success can&#x27;t be achieved without fundraising.
melbourne_matover 11 years ago
A few points pg missed:<p>- be white<p>- be under 30. Preferably under 25<p>- don&#x27;t sound too foreign<p>- make sure you are well connected and&#x2F;or went to harvard, mit or some such<p>- look like Zuck if at all possible!<p>Did I leave anything out?
fieldforceappover 11 years ago
Thank you, pg. I would amend the summary by including an encouraging word to the founders:<p>&quot;Avoid investors till you decide to raise money, and then when you do, talk to them all in parallel, prioritized by expected value, and accept offers greedily; build rejection into your plans by having a range of realistic, acceptable fundraising targets. Get back to work quickly.&quot;
knownover 11 years ago
The Ultimate Cheat Sheet to Starting and Running Your Own Business<p><a href="http://www.jamesaltucher.com/2013/08/the-ultimate-cheat-sheet-to-starting-and-running-your-own-business/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.jamesaltucher.com&#x2F;2013&#x2F;08&#x2F;the-ultimate-cheat-shee...</a>
hynahmwxsbybover 11 years ago
Great article PG. I&#x27;d like to see more case studies on a successful fundraise at the individual level. How much foreplY do you need before you ask them to bed? How many initial meetings will here likely be? How long does this take?
tomjohnson3over 11 years ago
this is perhaps the most honest and accurate description of what you will likely find in raising money - couple with <i>fantastic</i> advice. in fact, it accurately reflects my first experience and rookie mistakes raising money in a secondary market: wasting time by being led on by investors who don&#x27;t lead; eventually closing a first investor, which started a rush; etc. if you&#x27;re raising money for the first time, please read this multiple times...for your sanity&#x27;s sake.
amattnover 11 years ago
Know your audience. I love that pg uses distributed algorithms as an analogy of how to treat VCs (failure is the default state).
graycatover 11 years ago
The line in the essay I liked best was:<p>&gt; But there may be cases where a startup either wouldn&#x27;t want to grow faster, or outside money wouldn&#x27;t help them to, and if you&#x27;re one of them, don&#x27;t raise money.<p>Having the essay earlier would have saved me a lot of time and effort. For my startup, I tried for a long time to raise money, and as in the essay it was a huge distraction from the real work. Eventually, at absurdly high cost in time and effort, I concluded the more common half of what is in the essay.<p>Since I wanted to try hard to crack the nut of fund raising, I kept at the effort until I got some decent understanding.<p>Also I had to conclude that VCs and I do projects and project planning and evaluation in very different ways. Since it was quite a while ago that I was 20 years old, and I&#x27;ve done a lot of projects and seen a lot of business, I prefer my approaches to project planning and evaluation. Also, for my project, my technical background, in applied mathematics, is far above that of all but maybe 10 VCs in the country. There is likely not a single VC in the country who could understand the crucial core of my project, some original applied math I derived, and only a few VCs who could even direct a competent review of that crucial core. So, I just can&#x27;t be impressed by what VCs think of the crucial core of my project. When I was fund raising, I wondered how the VCs would evaluate my work; the answer is, they wouldn&#x27;t! So, they don&#x27;t have a clue about what they are missing.<p>So, net, VCs will evaluate my project based on <i>traction</i> which should mean that, for me, a solo founder with meager <i>burn rate</i>, by the time a VC wants to write a check, as in the quote above from the essay, I will no longer be willing to accept one.<p>After the fund raising effort, I settled on the line in the essay I quoted above: For me, and as often in the essay, the VCs are just too much trouble to work with to be worthwhile. Yes, the VCs are trouble in fund raising, but also the VCs will bring Board overhead, more time&#x2F;money with lawyers and accountants, and, then, in case of the success they want, an IPO with all the Wall Street and SEC nonsense. Handling all that would be a full time job for me, the CEO of my company; that&#x27;s not the kind of work I want to do; and my hands would be taken from actually building and running my company.<p>I see another point: In the US, businesses are started and succeed coast to coast in big cities down to crossroads by solo founders by the millions each year. Such a business might be a pizza shop, auto repair shop, landscaping service, big truck&#x2F;little truck business, etc.<p>My startup, with me as solo founder, is in <i>information technology</i> (IT) which should be a huge advantage: E.g., my first server farm will cost less than the truck and lawn mower of the guys who cut grass in my neighborhood, and the Internet connection I need will cost less than $100 a month. Moreover if I half fill the Internet connection, then from simple arithmetic my revenue and earnings in one year will be quite comparable with funds from a Series A.<p>So I just view my <i>startup</i> as a one person pizza shop but with some big advantages from IT; e.g., a pizza shop owner needs to be in the shop for each dollar made, and my server farm can be making money while I sleep.<p>For PG&#x27;s definition of a <i>startup</i> in terms of very rapid growth, so rapid that VC funds become important, that&#x27;s not important to me. I need a nice business; I don&#x27;t have to shoot for another Google and wouldn&#x27;t want to manage anything that big anyway.<p>A recent remark of Mark Andreessen is that there are only about 15 startups a year that deserve a Series A. So, the essay is talking about only about 15 startups a year and, thus, I am not disappointed the essay is not talking about my startup.<p>The VCs and I will have to disagree on how to plan, evaluate, start, and build a company. If I am successful, then likely that disagreement will have been a big part of my success.<p>The VCs remind me of the Mother Goose story <i>The Little Red Hen</i> when she could get help only when she had fragrant, hot loaves of bread coming out of the oven and customers lining up to buy and no longer needed any help.<p>For me, one really serious turnoff of VCs is that, since they have really no chance of understanding the crucial core of my business or how I do projects, no way would I want to report to a Board with VCs. Vinod Khosla has some recent remarks on how <i>helpful</i> Board VCs are!<p>Another big turnoff of VCs is that, as reported on Fred Wilson&#x27;s blog, on average over the past 10 years, the VC ROI has been poor. Net, VCs do not have a lot of credibility in business.<p>Another big turnoff is that too many VCs were not STEM majors and have written little to no code.<p>Another big turnoff is that my startup, as is recommended for startups, is doing work that is new; well, there is some education for how to work effectively with things that are new, a Ph.D. degree; I have an appropriate one from a famous research university, and nearly no VCs do. I will have a tough time viewing a VC as a helpful colleague in the crucial core of my business.
评论 #6406376 未加载
评论 #6404232 未加载
rwalianyover 11 years ago
Great article.<p>&quot;might me&quot; =&gt; &quot;might be&quot;
ffrryuuover 11 years ago
It&#x27;s who you know, not what you know.
评论 #6403648 未加载