What's dumb money?(venturehacks.com)
venturehacks.com
What's dumb money?
http://venturehacks.com/articles/dumb-money
2 comments
This reminds me of the old joke about the wife asking the husband on whether or not her butt is fat. There is no good answer here and the absolute wrong one is when the husband asks for the definition of fat.
There is no definition of smart versus dumb money that would serve the discussion here.
My observation is that many of the Hacker News readers are first time entrepreneurs and my belief is that it is important that they understand that they don't build companies by relying on VC money (even if it comes from YC). The more they accept that VC money is dumb, the more they will focus on what it takes to build their companies.
There is no definition of smart versus dumb money that would serve the discussion here.
My observation is that many of the Hacker News readers are first time entrepreneurs and my belief is that it is important that they understand that they don't build companies by relying on VC money (even if it comes from YC). The more they accept that VC money is dumb, the more they will focus on what it takes to build their companies.
The more they accept that VC money is dumb, the more they will focus on what it takes to build their companies.
Larry & Sergey, Max Levchin, and Mark Zuckerberg all took VC money. If they're dumb, who counts as smart?
Larry & Sergey, Max Levchin, and Mark Zuckerberg all took VC money. If they're dumb, who counts as smart?
I never said that we don't take VC money.
I just said that we take VC money when all we need is money.
Which by way is exactly what these gentlemen did? They didn't treat VC money as R&D money but instead they treat them as working capital. They took VC money when they have paying customers and a working business model and it was time to grow the company.
The point that I am trying to make in my own writing (http://www.startupforless.com) is that entrepreneurs should concentrate on building their company with their own money FIRST and when they have a ready product, they can CHOOSE.
On the other hand, there is nothing wrong with the YC model which is to take money early. But YC is an exception, not the rule. And YC money is clearly smart money.
But there are a whole bunch of us who doesn't fit the YC model.
I just said that we take VC money when all we need is money.
Which by way is exactly what these gentlemen did? They didn't treat VC money as R&D money but instead they treat them as working capital. They took VC money when they have paying customers and a working business model and it was time to grow the company.
The point that I am trying to make in my own writing (http://www.startupforless.com) is that entrepreneurs should concentrate on building their company with their own money FIRST and when they have a ready product, they can CHOOSE.
On the other hand, there is nothing wrong with the YC model which is to take money early. But YC is an exception, not the rule. And YC money is clearly smart money.
But there are a whole bunch of us who doesn't fit the YC model.
"They took VC money when they have paying customers and a working business model and it was time to grow the company."
Paypal had no idea what their business model was going to be when they took VC (they tried to fight off ebay sellers to begin with), their idea changed every week. They actually raised money so they could buy users (literally, they gave users money if they signed up).
"entrepreneurs should concentrate on building their company with their own money FIRST"
it's precisely because this isn't an option for young founders out of college that something like YC exists. we have no money of our own in the first place so taking external investment is our only option.
Paypal had no idea what their business model was going to be when they took VC (they tried to fight off ebay sellers to begin with), their idea changed every week. They actually raised money so they could buy users (literally, they gave users money if they signed up).
"entrepreneurs should concentrate on building their company with their own money FIRST"
it's precisely because this isn't an option for young founders out of college that something like YC exists. we have no money of our own in the first place so taking external investment is our only option.
I think YC is a great concept.
It is actually not a VC but more like an adoption agency that takes promising orphans off the street (not based on needs and not based more merits, but based on genetic match) ... feed them and cloth them, then send them off to foster parents (real VC's) who can afford to bring them up properly.
I don't mean to be harsh. And I have great respect for everyone who is involved with YC. And I am certainly not trying to be a sour grape.
I am just saying that it is unique.
It is actually not a VC but more like an adoption agency that takes promising orphans off the street (not based on needs and not based more merits, but based on genetic match) ... feed them and cloth them, then send them off to foster parents (real VC's) who can afford to bring them up properly.
I don't mean to be harsh. And I have great respect for everyone who is involved with YC. And I am certainly not trying to be a sour grape.
I am just saying that it is unique.
For a bootstrapping entrepreneur, VC money is a drug and a distraction. And by calling it "Smart" money, the popular culture is attempting to turn it into a "legalized" drug. This is a really good article and having been in the trenches for many years, I highly recommend it to the YC community. VC money should be dumb, the dumber the better. Only by understanding this assertion, can one focus on what it really takes to build a company ... and it is not about taking VC money. Enjoy.
An evil VC who wants to control your company or fire you as CEO or merge you with one of his portfolio companies could be called "bad money," but that is certainly not what people currently use the phrase "dumb money" to describe.