stephnass
Joined 6 years ago
Joined 6 years ago
The test is not out of 100 points. The idea is to place you against other companies raising at the same time. If you have no revenue and everyone else has revenue, you will rank lower because at the end of the day, it's a competition.
As a general rule, investors invest if (a) you have track record or (b) you have traction i.e. users and/or revenue. If you have neither, look at grants, accelerators, and family and friends instead. And your own money, ofc.
I know it's counter-intuitive for many. Aren't VCs supposed to take risks and put the first check in?
That's not how VCs think. They will see 5,000 decks a year and invest in 5, so they just pick the strongest projects at a given point in time.
Not denying your efforts and potential, but there's just another project that looks better on paper: more proven team, more traction. It's all relative.
On that topic, check out these 2 graphs that apply to your case: https://x.com/StephNass/status/1859447351187787826
For a longer read with some maths, this post by Jonah Probell is eye opening: https://www.openvc.app/blog/seed-stage-is-about-picking-winn...
We just launched a new way for investors to find startups to invest in.
Completely free for both sides.
How it works: - Founder signs up and enters company details - Top deals are anonymized and listed on an open page - Investor can browse deals and request intros - If founder accepts, then the details are revealed to the investor
We beta tested with 50 investors and generated 50 qualified calls from 200 "request" clicks, all with zero human intervention from us.
I was surprised this didn't already exist. Seems simple enough, but it could create a new deal flow channel on top of warm intros and cold emails.
Thoughts?
Interesting, didn't realize that payroll was so high that you could actually afford to lose the ship and not break a sweat.