Justas Janauskas

Atomico, founded in 2006 by Skype co-founder Niklas Zennström, raised two new funds worth $1.24 billion to back European technology firms. • The two new funds are comprised of a $754 million growth-stage fund for startups raising Series B to pre-IPO financing and a $485 million early stage fund. • The fresh fundraising comes as two of Atomico’s key portfolio companies, Stripe and Klarna, have been circled by speculation of upcoming IPOs. Read more from CNBC: https://lnkd.in/d8nDDTha This raises a significant question: several fund managers have personally told me that fundraising is challenging right now. Yet, at the same time, Ilya Sutskever, co-founder and former chief scientist of OpenAI, recently raised $1 billion in just three months for his new AI startup... Are we witnessing a disparity in the fundraising landscape, where select individuals or firms have easier access to capital? #capitalraising #vc #investments #skype

5

Do winners define the market opportunity? As Jannik Sinner pocketed a stonking $3.6m for his US Open win, I couldn’t help but think how this compares to an average professional player’s experience on the tour and what founders can glean from that. There are currently around 1,800 professional ATP tennis players globally who made it past several difficult selection screens over the first couple of decades of their life. They are the best of the best. Yet so far in 2024, according to online sources: -         An average pro player ranked around 900 has made around $5k in prize money (!) -         180th player or top decile player made $180k in prize money -         18th player, or 99th percentile, made $2m -         Top player made over $10m Many around us will take Jannik’s win in a celebrity-studded Arthur Ashe stadium for a sign that tennis players have it amazingly well, although only a very few do. Add to that limited playing careers, the fact that you only get paid for tournaments you play, tennis seems a surprisingly difficult career to build and not too dissimilar to the one of a founder. Whilst the biggest entrepreneurial successes are deservedly visible and famous like Jannik is in tennis today, it is worth for founders to learn from tennis players and focus on the basics of the process and the opportunity: 1)     Do it because you love it – whilst spoils come to the select few, the process of perfecting the craft is the only sustainable path to success 2)     Pick something at what you can excel – passion is a necessary but not sufficient condition – you need to also figure out why you and your team are the best suited to capture an opportunity – do you have unique insights or better execution capability than most others? 3)     Surround yourself with strong support team – you will need a lot of diverse support on your roller-coaster journey to reach the top of the top, who will be in your “player’s box”? 4)     Success is a game of marginal gains - steady and incremental improvements in team, product and market positioning can over time lead to disproportionate gains thanks to compounding effects 5)     Some markets are better than others – tennis might not be the easiest way to make a living though still much better than many other sports that suffer from limited prize, media and sponsorship opportunities. Winning in a market where for example winner-takes-all or most can be exponentially more lucrative than otherwise 6)     “Overnight success” is the name you usually get after decades of grind – for those founders who endure the thorny path to the top 1% you will then often be called lucky as the survivorship bias kicks in  😊 In the increasingly power-law driven world, being a top 1% performer can make all the difference. It takes time and dedication to the process of building and improvement, and hopefully for some there is a shiny trophy at the end to boot. #usopen #greatness #entrepreneurship #powerlaw

66

3 Comments

Startups are high-stakes gaming. How do you master the art of the bet? (Day 84). I'm not a gambler. I never understood why people bet when they know that the odds are in favor of the house. And yet, here I am, running a startup. The entrepreneurial casino has 2 types of bets: > The Stupid gamble > The Smart gamble Let's start with the odds of the "Stupid" gamble. Out of 1,000 Startups: > 900 fail > 25 return less than invested > 25 return 1-3x > 25 return 3-10x > 15 return 10-30x > 9 return 30-100x > 1 returns 100x+ The math ain't mathing. If you're at a casino, knowing these odds, would you bet your life savings and a decade of your life? That's why it's the "Stupid" gamble... but there's a good reason people make it. When Jeff Bezos quit his cushy Hedge Fund job to start Cadabra (renamed to Amazon), he said that you have to be crazy enough to believe that you can beat the odds. He also said: "I knew that if I failed, I wouldn't regret that, but I knew the one thing I might regret is not trying." The stupid gamble doesn't make sense, but it feels right... and sometimes you do hit the jackpot. So, what's the "Smart" gamble? Remember: When you enter the race, you start with literally no thing. Everything you build, add, buy, sell, hire is a decision with uncertain outcome and in uncharted territory - a bet. This builds your entrepreneurial "scar tissue". It's like counting cards, because the track record of your bets' outcomes helps you make more educated bets, slowly improving your odds. This whole dynamic is what makes it frightening yet exciting at the same time. When I was a consultant, we'd often come in if a company was losing money because costs > revenue, and we were tasked to fix it.  > Downsize an inefficient org? > Prioritize a bloated product lineup? > Improve your messaging with marketing/rebrand? > Spur growth with bold moves? We'd figure because we had data. Early-stage startups don't (yes, that's why the "MBB / banker" fares much better as employee at scale-ups). Often, you navigate with little more than a hunch and a prayer. The biggest bets at startups are: > Do we need more time to finetune (persist) or do we pursue something else we had traction in (pivot)? > Am I doing this thing that seems to make a lot of sense (low hanging fruit) or do I stick to what I believe in (why you started)? Spoiler #1: No one has the answer. Spoiler #2: There's no such thing as a low-hanging fruit. Spiler #3: Forget about sunk costs for goodness' sake (note to self). So, what's the takeaway? Welcome to the casino, baby: > Every decision is a bet. > Indecision kills - so does waffling. > Trust your gut but question your biases. > To play the game, get comfortable rolling the dice. > Be prepared to fold when the odds turn against you. > Remember why you sat down at this table in the first place. What are your thoughts on all this? Any war stories? // 100-day challenge of daily #RealTalk

5

🔍 From Guesswork to Precision: How Miros is Redefining Product Discovery 🧠 Imagine finding your next favorite product without typing a single word. At Miros, we’re making that a reality with Wordless Search, thanks to the brilliance of our Head of UX, Ahto Pärn. Through the power of micro-interactions, our AI learns from subtle user behaviors, delivering highly personalized recommendations. It’s not just about finding what you like—it’s about finding what you love. Learn how we’re blending AI and UX to make shopping effortless. 🚀 👉 Get to know Ahto in our blog: https://lnkd.in/d6EhiWbT #EcommerceInnovation #AI #UXDesign #ProductDiscovery #MirosAI #FutureOfShopping

7

🚀 Are Europe's Startups in Need of a New Breed of Venture Capital Investor? 🌍 💡 According to David Rosskamp, managing partner of Berlin-based Magnetic Capital, "world-class venture capital is an artisan craft." He contrasts it with the industrial-scale operations of some of Europe's largest institutions, suggesting that these organizations operate with large and undisciplined portfolios, making it challenging to stay closely connected to their investments. 🎯Rosskamp's firm, Magnetic Capital, takes a different approach. "Our funds are deliberately small," he explains, "capped at €120 million." This deliberate choice allows Magnetic to run focused portfolios of early-stage investments in specific themes, offering closer attention to the businesses it backs. 📉 The argument is compelling. While investors in venture capital funds have sometimes been underwhelmed by the results, the sector has also had some big hits. Rosskamp's approach challenges the status quo, advocating for a return to focused, disciplined investing for potentially better results. 💰 Rosskamp, however, is convinced that Magnetic resonates with investors, as well as businesses looking for funding support. He emphasizes the importance of discipline in venture capital outperformance, a key factor often overlooked in Europe. With a team that operates through partners rather than an inflated organization, Magnetic aims to maintain a hands-on approach to its investments. Rosskamp describes Magnetic's approach as a "1970s-style" venture capital approach, with partners engaging in deep-level discussions about portfolio direction. “We think in first principles,” he explains. “What are the necessary building blocks of an inevitable future in our themes and target sectors, and how can we help create them?” 🔍 Magnetic's current focus areas include resilience and security, climate, and modernization of core industries, seeking early-stage firms with broader applications. Examples range from plant-based meat production technology to neobrokers and energy suppliers. Rosskamp emphasizes Magnetic's history of being early movers in emerging sectors, supporting startups that later attract broader investor attention. 💡 Despite Europe's evolving venture capital landscape, Rosskamp believes there's still room for Magnetic's unique approach, promising to back ambitious attempts to address Europe's biggest challenges and create lasting impact. Original interview published by Forbes ✅ Looking to raise capital for your #fund and increase the international pool of your LP #investors?   🤝 Need warm #LP introductions?   📝 Selling #secondaries to increase liquidity?   🧐 Looking for co-investments?   ▶ G+QUANT's link for inquiries and fund decks: https://lnkd.in/gjC_EuTE #VentureCapital #EuropeanStartups #InvestmentStrategy #FocusedInvesting #DisciplinedInvestment #StartupSupport #Entrepreneurship #Innovation

3

It's tech nerds, hackers, and startups and local business units and army techies who are winning the war in Ukraine. In the video: Live footage of a multi-million Russian helicopter shot down as it took off by a sub 100k Ukranian drone. Putin with his policy and war of aggression has already drained the best brains out of Russia and made the country a toxic environment for startups and tech weirdos. Too bad that defence is being disrupted right now by tech that's not driven by multi-million purchases of large helicopters, tanks and missiles... ...But by folks and teams turning drones and other technologies into lethal weapons en mass, and scaleups bringing AI to the battlefield. And this is with systems being "hacked together" by the local units. Ukraine is already testing #deeptech stuff coming fresh from startups from the US, UK and the whole of Europe. Once THAT stuff goes all out, Russia will lose the war. And warfare won't look like anything it used to. It may be uncomfortable for some founders or investors to have this discussion. But whether you want it or not, this is a new reality, in a world where dictators are attacking democratic countries or threatening to. You can be part of that conversation building and funding the companies that will reshape defence (and the safety deterrent that comes with it). Or ignore the topic and hope that someone else does the "dirty job" for you. I know where I stand. 🇺🇦

13

How much is a vision worth to you? Let's disrupt startup valuations for real impact. Thomas Visti's post on valuation sparked something in me. It got even deeper after my chat with Kim Østergaard today. It made me think deeply about how we value our startup. Inspired by them, I'm being transparent about how I value Your Longevity. Your Longevity is seeking 100,000 EUR for a 15% share, valuing us at 670K EUR (5 million DKK).💵 This valuation reflects our clear growth plans, strong KPIs, and a unique market position in personalized health, especially with the growing demand for longevity among people 40+. 4 WHYs for Your Longevity's Valuation 1️⃣ Why 3x ROI by 2028? We expect 3x return by 2028 thanks to our scalable SaaS model, growing health tech market, and a projected €1 million revenue by 2027. The health tech market in Europe is also expected to grow 8% per year, reaching €75 billion by 2030. 2️⃣ Why invest in health tech? To control health: invest in preventive measures, 8% market growth! Preventive health is crucial, especially for people 40+. In Europe, 35-50% of this age group suffers from lifestyle diseases. We aim to help people take control of their health in a market growing 8% annually, currently valued at €75 billion. 3️⃣ Why our customer acquisition strategy works Our CAC starts at €500 due to launch costs but will lower by 20-30% by year two. With a target market of 10 million people in Europe, we believe in strong growth potential and scalability. 4️⃣ Why the market is ready 1 in 3 people worldwide suffer from lifestyle diseases, and in Europe 35-50%. Our population is aging but also becoming more ill. Statistics show that people in their 40s and 50s are becoming sicker, often stuck in pain and illness compared to previous generations. In many ways, our healthcare system keeps us alive, but falls short in terms of prevention. Growth milestones ↳100 clients by Q1 2025, growing to 500 clients by end of 2026. ↳Scalable onboarding using tech and automation to grow without big costs. Investment Breakdown ↳ 30% product development: AI, new features, real-time updates. ↳25% marketing & sales: Get customers, build partnerships, boost brand. ↳Remaining funds: Infrastructure, operations, salary, and growth in Europe. I'm sharing this plan to show our investment logic, tied to clear KPIs and milestones. I'd love to hear your thoughts on our valuation, vision, or growth plan. Let's create a healthier future together! ✌️ Join our journey. What are your thoughts on our valuation strategy? Let's learn from each other 👇 Share your insights in the comments! #Investment #Startups #Valuation #YourLongevity #KPI #InvestorCall

6

2 Comments

With our $61.500 USD (430.000 DKK) investment We will not hire anyone. Here is how we will use it: Monthly costs Salaries Marius - 2200 USD (15.000 DKK) Villads - 2200 USD (15.000 DKK) Software licenses Total - 1100 USD (7.500 DKK) Food (dinner for the long evenings) Total - 1000 USD (7.500 DKK) Office 2 desks - 600 USD (4.000 DKK) Other - 1000 USD (7.000 DKK) Monthly income: Recurring revenue - 3250 USD (23.000 DKK) In short, we’ve been able to build a product from 0 to 1 and get to 3250 MRR without funding I think every founder would agree that it was way harder to get from 0 to 3250 MRR than to go from 3250 MRR to 10.000 MRR When we hit that we will be profitable Which means that we can grow faster The key insight that Sebastian Seilund and Esben Friis-Jensen taught us In our situation, money does not guarantee that we grow faster, it can easily be a distraction So we will continue to do everything ourselves Keep executing 🦄 #investment #unicorn #StartUp #founder 

915

76 Comments

🐔🐔 The chickens of 2021 are coming home to roost! 🐔🐔 🚀🚀 2021 was the craziest year in startup land since the dot-com boom. European startup funding hit €100B - more than 2x compared to the year before. 💸💸 Back then I sat on both sides of the table - as an angel I threw money left and right and begged companies without business models to take my money and as a founder I was part of raising a huge round at a massive valuation, considering the stage we were at. 💋💋 Many of those rounds were a kiss of death! Along with the money came the imperative of growth at all cost… starting in 2022 the advice shifted, low-burn and profitability came into fashion... 📈📈 But growth is obviously the name of the game in venture capital. No one wants to invest in a company that's not growing. 😭😭 Keeping up growth while cutting costs is hard. Defending a high valuation while cutting costs and not growing is nearly impossible. An overvalued company that is not growing and firing their staff is a falling knife. Uninvestable. 🤫🤫 It has been awfully quiet around most companies that raised in 2021. The median time between early stage funding rounds is about two years and as you can only pivot and bridge for so long, time should be running out… ☠☠ As the graph below from Carta and the Financial Times shows, in the US, startups of every size and dignity are shutting their doors for good. This is the legacy of 2021. When anyone could raise money. 😖😖 Fundraising is hard again. The way it normally is and the way it should be! 👨🏻‍🎓 👩🏻‍🎓 This fall I will launch The Art of Fundraising, a comprehensive course on how to raise venture capital for early stage founders. I have put everything that I have learnt as a venture capitalist, angel investor and fundraising founder into the course. And then some! ✏✏ Hit me up in the comments if you want to hear more about the course!!

119

16 Comments

From 12-18 to 24+ months: Raising between two rounds is getting longer, but is it really bad for founders? •In the past couple of weeks several data points showed that the time between two successive financing rounds is getting significantly longer. •Pre-2022, most VC backed startups raised money every 12 to 18 months until the Series B. •It concretely means that startups had to hit specific milestones every 12 to 18 months to be able to raise again. •And these milestones depended on the “VC zeitgeist”. It could be growth rate, revenue level, product milestones etc… •Fast forward today it’s around 24 to 32 months between two rounds. While it shows that access to funding is getting tougher, is it really a bad thing? First of all, what does it fundamentally change for founders? ----------------------------------------------------------- •Obviously founders need to adjust their burn rate so that they can survive longer than 12/18 months with what they have raised. •They need to focus on sustainable growth. The current “VC zeitgeist” is not about “growth at all costs” milestones anymore but about “sustainable growth” oriented ones. To raise the next round you need to have healthy unit economics. •Board meetings have often dramatically changed. It’s sometimes an almost schizophrenic experience to go from a board that asks you to be super aggressive with growth to a board that asks you to build a sustainable business. •It’s better to have VCs that can support you through bridge rounds over a longer period of time. I know a couple of early stage founders that have raised €1-1.5M with syndicates and small VC firms and are now stuck because they cannot do bridge rounds. So, all in all is it a bad thing? ---------------------------- •If you make the correct adjustments (and most early stage founders have probably done it) I do not think that it’s such a bad thing for founders. •I know many founders that were uncomfortable with the pre-2022 VC Zeitgeist and didn’t feel good when they were pushed by VCs to hire aggressively or spend more money to grow faster. •And many prefer the current situation where the emphasis is on building a real business from day one and accelerate only when it makes sense. And not the other way. The real problem for most SaaS founders is not the longer time between two rounds, but rather to get the very first checks with VCs that are ready to support them over a longer period of time (through bridge rounds).

3

Securing funding as a startup entrepreneur can feel like navigating a maze in the dark. ❖ Constantly pitching to investors, only to face rejection after rejection. ❖ Struggling to find funds without losing equity in your dream company. ❖ Drowning in a sea of paperwork and strict requirements. I get it. I’ve been there, and I know how frustrating and demoralizing it can be. But what if I told you there's a better way? At Burns Funding, we've pioneered a unique funding mechanism that flips the script on traditional startup financing. Here’s how: ❖ Unsecured Funding: You don’t need to put your assets on the line. We provide unsecured loans, freeing you from the stress of collateral. ❖ No Repayment Hassle: We invest a portion of the funds to generate returns that cover your payments. Imagine focusing on growing your business instead of worrying about repayments. ❖ Pre-Approved Applicants: With a 630 FICO credit score you’re automatically pre-approved. No more grueling vetting processes. Sounds too good to be true? It’s not. This innovative approach allows entrepreneurs like you to receive $100k-$150k on average, with some even securing up to $800k. Entrepreneurs deserve a funding solution as innovative as their ideas. At Burns Funding, we’re committed to making that a reality. Don't let traditional funding challenges hold you back. Let's turn your vision into reality without sacrificing equity or peace of mind. Reach out today and discover how Burns Funding can fuel your entrepreneurial journey. 🚀 #Entrepreneurship #StartupFunding #InnovativeFinance #BurnsFunding

64

16 Comments

Hey fellow founders! Need #VC investor contacts? No need to follow or subscribe – just check out the list of 1500 contacts in the comments. Feel free to connect if you want to stay in touch and share experiences! ❤️ We all know that cold outreach to investors is one of the toughest parts of being a founder. It's draining, demotivating, and boring. You want to focus on building your startup, but end up sending endless emails and rarely hearing back. I used to dread this too, but I've learned a lot and gotten better at it. Here are three things to remember for the sake of your mental health: 1. You're offering investors an opportunity, not begging for money. 2. Don’t take rejections or silence PERSONALLY. It's tough, but true. The worst is actually getting a meeting with someone who's just using you for practice or to learn about the industry. 3. Be mindful and avoid spamming investors. Nobody likes that. #startup #founderlife #sharing #VC #investors #tech #Founder

24

3 Comments

For SaaS companies generating between $5M and $20M in ARR, what are the most common mistakes when it comes to pricing? And what are tactical & feasible best practices founders can apply & operationalize so that their companies excel at pricing? Sat down with Krzysztof Szyszkiewicz, founder of Valueships, to get his take on these questions. Common Mistakes: 1. Treating pricing as an afterthought 2. Lowering prices out of fear—blaming pricing instead of addressing core issues. 3. Ignoring discount strategy—lacking governance Applicable Best Practices: 1. Dedicate resources: Allocate 50% of an analyst’s time to pricing analytics. 2. Hold leadership accountable: Make someone on the executive team responsible for pricing—and have them discuss it during board meetings. 3. Review pricing regularly: Have quarterly discussions on discounting strategy and bi-annual conversations on price optimization—then act on it. 4. Bonus: Continuously optimize deal terms and conditions. Make incremental improvements to standard deal terms a company-wide commitment.

37

4 Comments

From the start of my Product journey I’ve always found PMF as one of the most interesting topics to me, I’ve found on it a weird combination of hard science and gut feeling, that highly specific scenario where a product that solves a true need actually finds a way to the users with that need and within time/budget/mindset and a ton of other variables in order to make enough impact to be successful; uf! A though thing to do. Now I find in Aakash Gupta take to ‘Position Market Fit’ a true description of that combination as I’ve seen it in my experience, adding dimensions that truly explain how to actually achieve the connection needed between a product, their targeted problem and the right subset of users looking to solve that particular problem at the specific price on the channels that they’re and I love the way Product practice is evolving. In my mind it’s about always keep on listening to the users, getting feedback (absolutely all the time) and most importantly action on those findings. Great insight.

8

Today at the office, one of my working mate asked me, "What is growth?" 💡 Many people think growth is just about getting cheap users or pulling off magic tricks. But in reality, it’s much simpler and more strategic: ⚡️ Growth manages the flow of users in a product. It’s like being a plumber, adjusting the business’s pipelines to ensure everything runs smoothly. My work in growth involves four key parts: 1️⃣ Acquisition: Bringing customers to your product and developing effective acquisition channels. 2️⃣ Activation: Ensuring they experience your product’s value for the first time and start developing usage habits. 3️⃣ Engagement: Making sure your customers continue using your product regularly and keep receiving value. 4️⃣ Monetization: Aligning the value you deliver with the value you receive. Designing the right monetization model for your product. 👉 This is what we do at Appex. #growth #marketing #genai

13

3 Comments

From 0-10 mio dollars in revenue in 1 year! Last week I talked to a couple of VC's who had turned down this company in their early beginning. The reason was that the tech was not overwhelmingly good, it was AI but not something that really brought attention to the eye. The founders seemed great and had clear knowledge within the field. Yet they had very low traction. They received numerous rejections yet ended up finding someone who believed in the idea, them as founders and the market. They ended up raising a 2 mio dollar pre-seed round, then they launched their beta. Then came a 19 mio dollar Series A. Then a 80 mio dollar series B. Execution beats everything, technology market etc. If you find entrepreneurs who can execute and execute fast, they will typically make things work. Today that company is worth more than 1B dollars with investors like Andressen Horowitz and Sequoia Capital and it is called ElevenLabs. Thanks to the trust and financial help from Credo Ventures and Concept Ventures they were able to prove themselves and scale! Moral of the story, keep going, iterate and perfect your pitch and vision until you hear the magic words: "Yes we are in. "

11

4 Comments

🚨You might never look at startup validation the same way after reading this.🚨 Hi am Nick, some of you know me as a seasoned Product Strategist and owner of axiomy - Product Validation and Design Studio, organizer of the Startup Activator 5.0 or even an owner of pizza places in Varna. I will share in a second, what unconventional techniques I use when validating business ideas (I have a lot), features or a whole software product. As It is just a LinkedIn post, I can't put everything I know in one piece but if you are interested in how I use these techniques, write a comment below and I will send you my case studies. My experience spans from FinTech to FoodTech, equipping me with a unique understanding of the diverse challenges faced by entrepreneurs. Having walked the challenging path of startup validation alongside numerous clients, I am well-versed in navigating the complexities of launching successful ventures across various industries. Long story short: We all know the orthodox ways to validate ideas but I've discovered some potent validation techniques that are often the least conventional. Here we go: 🔴 Wizard of Oz MVP - Don’t have the product yet? No problem. Create the facade of a functional product and manually handle the operations behind the scenes. It sounds deceptive, but it’s a goldmine for gathering user feedback without full-scale development. I’ve seen clients amass invaluable insights this way, shaping their products to precisely meet user expectations. 🔴 Prototyping on Social Media - This is where you turn likes, shares, and comments into a gold standard for product validation. I've worked with brands that crafted product mock-ups, shared them on social platforms, and gauged interest based on real-time user interactions. It's fast, it's public, and it can significantly pivot your product direction with minimal spending. 🔴 Fake Door Testing - Place a button for a non-existent feature and measure interest by the number of clicks it receives. This method helped one of my clients scrap a feature that would have wasted $200K in development costs. Turns out, not many were keen on clicking that shiny new button. 🔴 Sell Before You Build - Imagine selling your product before it even exists. Sounds tricky, right? But it's incredibly effective. This approach not only validates the market demand but also secures some initial funding. I’ve guided startups to use pre-sales as a litmus test for their product viability. 🔴 Letter of Intent - Nothing screams ‘market validation’ louder than a signed letter of intent from a potential buyer. It's a commitment that validates your idea like no other. Whether it’s a bulk purchase or a subscription before launch, these letters have helped my clients lock in demand and attract further investment. Whether it’s your first venture or the next big pivot, let’s validate your idea and pave the way for your startup’s success. #startup #ideavalidation #productdevelopment #strategies

9

5 Comments

Making 10X in Venture is more complicated than most people think. Recently I interacted with Martin Tobias, Managing Partner with Incisive Ventures, who invested $160k in a Start-up at a $16 million Post-money Valuation 3 years ago. The company just raised at a $250mn Post-money. So we may think that the return is $250mn/ $16mn= 15.6X but in reality, his return is 5.5X only. Here is the math. 📊 Seed Round Dynamics: - Seed Investment= $160k - Post-money Valuation= $16mn - Dilution= $160k/ $16mn= 1% - Founder Ownership= 100%-1%= 99% 📊 Two months later they raised $25 million at a $50 million Pre-money Valuation Series A Round Dynamics: - Pre-money Valuation= $50mn - Series A Investment= $25mn - Post-money Valuation= $75 mn - Dilution= $25mn/ $75mn= 33.33% - Seed Investor’s Ownership= (1-33.33%)*1%= 0.67% - Founder’s Ownership= (1-33.33%)*99%= 66% 📊 As part of the Series A Round, they refreshed the Option Pool for an additional 9% dilution - Seed Investor Ownership= 0.67%*91%= 0.61% - Series A Ownership= 33.33%*91%= 30.33% - Founder Ownership= 66%*91%= 60.06% - Refreshed Option Pool is 9% 📊 One year later the Company raised a $5mn SAFE at $100mn Pre-money Valuation for another 5% dilution - Seed Investor Ownership= 0.61%*(1-5%)= 0.58% - Series A= 30.33%*95%= 28.81% - Founder= 60.06%*95%= 57.06% - Option Pool= 9%*95%= 8.55% 📊 Four months later they raised $40mn at a $125mn Pre-money Valuation. - Post Money Valuation= $40mn+ $125mn= $165mn - Series B Dilution= $40mn/ $165mn= 24.24% - Seed Investor= 0.58%*(1-24.24%)= 0.58%*75.76%= 0.44% - Series A= 28.81%*75.76%= 21.83% - Founder= 57.06%*75.76%= 43.23% - Option Pool= 8.55%*75.76%= 6.48% - SAFE Note= 5%*75.76%= 3.79% 📊 Next they raised $50mn at a $200mn Pre-money Valuation which is $250mn Post-money Valuation. - Series C Dilution= $50mn/ $250mn= 20% - Series B= 24.24%*(1-20%)= 19.4% - Series A= 21.83%*80%= 17.46% - Seed= 0.44%*80%= 0.35% - Founder= 43.23%*80%= 34.58% - Option Pool= 6.48%*80%= 5.18% - SAFE Note=3.03% - Seed Investor Ownership Value= 0.35%*$250mn= $875k - Seed Investor Investment Value= $160k - Investment Return= $875k/ $160k= 5.5X 📊 Startup Valuation after Seed Investment= $16mn - After Series C Valuation= $250mn - Valuation Increase= 15.6X 🎯 Just to give you a context the company is a leader in its industry, has good margins, and is growing 3x YoY. It is growing partly through acquisitions that require more capital than many software companies. ~~~~~ ♻️ Found this helpful? Repost it so your network can learn from it, too. And follow me, Fazlur Shah for more content like this. #startups #entrepreneurship #venturecapital #investing

186

22 Comments