Loading...
Answers
MenuDo angel investors look for a certain number of active users when investing in an app startup that has recently launched, 5,000-10,000+?
This question has no further details.
Answers
First of all, there is no "one size fits all" attitude in angel investing. I will tell you that the *best* angels will make a snap decision by playing with the product and assessing founder/market fit. At the right valuation, the kinds of angels you really want backing you will invest purely based on a killer early product experience and conviction of founder/market fit.
But if you have made your app available in the US app store already, you have made a critical tactical error if your app isn't already trending towards 100,000 installs within the first 30 days of availability. Apps should first launch in a non US, english-speaking store to do early product/market fit work.
Your "day one" event in the US app store matters to seed investors and many angel investors. While there are exceptions (most often in SaaS or enterprise mobile models), there are only 4 times to raise funding from seed funds for a mobile start-up stage company:
Pre-product: A deck, a market opportunity and a team.
Pre-launch: Product fully built but holding launch for funding. This will usually involve a private beta of at least 1000 users or a soft launch in an international store.
30 - 90 days after US launch: Must be at or trending towards 100,000 installs with very strong month-over-month growth.
If you miss those windows, the next time to raise is after you pass over 1,000,000 with strong retention and engagement that correlates to your business model and user personas.
As a mobile-first entrepreneur and angel investor, I'm happy to talk to you about this in more detail
they look for traction, meaning they look for a tendency of growth and behaviour that will allow them to predict what could the outcome be if "fueled" by additional capital.
A stat is just a stat, it needs to show how it is behaving or compares to other similar apps.
Not necessarily, but certainly, the more the better. Ultimately, we're looking for 1) proof that the market cares about your offering, and 2) management traction.
Essentially, we're looking for ways to remove risk from the investing equation, so anything you can do to remove risk from the equation makes your investment more attractive. This translates into increased investor interest and greater valuations for you.
Put your investor cap on and find all of the things you might be worried about as an investor (adoption/attrition rates, customer acquisition costs, etc.) and have/create good answers for how you can mitigate or have mitigated those risks, or why the trend is positive. Back it up with numbers wherever possible.
Forget specific numbers, and make sure the underlying business trends are positive.
The trend is your friend. Good luck!
Users are a sign of traction a.k.a. proof of concept. Most angel investors want to fuel growth and help you strive for product market fit. If you're following the lean startup model - most angels will only engage once you found problem solution fit and are reaching for product market fit.
That being said 10,000 users is a typical benchmark.
Related Questions
-
VCs: What are some pitch deck pet peeves?
Avoid buzzwords: - every founder thinks their idea is disruptive/revolutionary - every founder says their financial projections are conservative Instead: - explain your validation & customer traction - explain the assumptions underlying your projections Avoid: - focusing extensively on the product/technology rather than on the business - misunderstanding the purpose of financial projections; they exist in a pitch deck to: a) validate the founders understanding of running a business b) provide a sense of magnitude of the opportunity versus the amount of capital requested c) confirm the go-to-market strategy (nothing undermines a pitch faster than financial projections disconnected from the declared go-to-market approach) d) generally discredit you as someone who understands how to build a company; for instance we'll capture 10% of our market, 1% of China, etc. Top down financial projections get big laughs from investors after you leave the room. bonus) don't show 90% profit margins. Ever. Even if you'll actually have them. Ever. Instead: - avoid false precision by rounding all projections to nearest thousands ($000) - include # units / # subscribers / # customers above revenue line; this goes hand-in-hand with building a bottom up revenue model and implicitly reveals assumptions. Investors will determine if you are realistic, conservative, or out of your mind based largely on the customer acquisition numbers and your explanation of how they will be achieved. - highlight your assumptions & milestones on first customers, cash flow break even, and other customer acquisition and expense metrics that are relevant Avoid: - thinking about investor money as your money - approaching the pitch from your mindset (I need money); investors have to be skeptics, so understand their perspective. - bad investors; it's tempting to think that any money is good money. You can't get an investor to leave once they are in without Herculean efforts and costs (and if you're asking for money, you can't afford it). If you're not on the same page with an investor on how to run/grow the business, you'll regret every waking hour. Instead: - it's their money; tell them how you are going to utilize their money to make them more money - you're a founder, a true believer. Your mantra should be "de-risk, de-risk, de-risk". Perception of risk is the #1 reason an investor says no. Many are legitimate, but often enough it's simply a perception that could have been addressed. - beyond the pitch, make the conversation 2-way. Ask questions of the investor (you might learn awesome things or uncover problems) and talk to at least two other founders they invested in more than 6 months ago.Jason PlimlJP
-
A tech startup fully outsourced. What problems would be in this situation?
The ideal way would be to hire the engineer while the project is still under development. You and the engineer should follow up with the outsourced partner in the process. This will give hold to the engineer and later more staff can be trained in upgrading or follow on versions of the product/service.Sunil MayreddySM
-
For every success story in Silicon Valley, how many are there that fail?
It all depends on what one decides to be a definition of a "success story." For some entrepreneurs, it might be getting acqui-hired, for some -- a $10M exit, for some -- a $200M exit, and for others -- an IPO. Based on the numbers I have anecdotally heard in conversations over the last decade or so, VCs fund about 1 in 350 ventures they see, and of all of these funded ventures, only about 1 in 10 become really successful (i.e. have a big exit or a successful IPO.) So you are looking at a 1 in 3500 chance of eventual venture success among all of the companies that try to get VC funding. (To put this number in perspective, US VCs invest in about 3000-3500 companies every year.) In addition, there might be a few others (say, maybe another 1-2 in every 10 companies that get VC investments) that get "decent" exits along the way, and hence could be categorized as somewhat successful depending on, again, how one chooses to define what qualifies as a "success story." Finally, there might also be companies that may never need or get around to seeking VC funding. One can, of course, find holes in the simplifying assumptions I have made here, but it doesn't really matter if that number instead is 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10000. The basic point being made here is just that the odds are heavily stacked against new ventures being successful. But that's also one of the distinguishing characteristics of entrepreneurs -- to go ahead and try to bring their idea to life despite the heavy odds. Sources of some of the numbers: http://www.nvca.org/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ven... https://www.pwcmoneytree.com/MTP... http://paulgraham.com/future.html Here are others' calculations of the odds that lead to a similar conclusion: 1.Dear Entrepreneurs: Here's How Bad Your Odds Of Success Are http://www.businessinsider.com/startup-odds-of-success-2013-5 2.Why 99.997% Of Entrepreneurs May Want To Postpone Or Avoid VC -- Even If You Can Get It http://www.forbes.com/sites/dileeprao/2013/07/29/why-99-997-of-entrepreneurs-may-want-to-postpone-or-avoid-vc-even-if-you-can-get-it/Mahesh Bhatia (Early-stage pitch decks)MB
-
How much equity should I ask as a C-level executive in a new startup ?
As you may suspect, there really isn't a hard and fast answer. You can review averages to see that a CEO typically becomes a major shareholder in a startup, but your role and renumeration will be based on the perceived value you bring to the organization. You value someone's contribution through equity when you think that they will be able to add long-term benefits, you would prefer that they don't move company part way through the process, and to keep them from being enticed by a better salary (a reason for equity tied to a vesting arrangement). Another reason is when the company doesn't have salary money available but the potential is very strong. In this situation you should be especially diligent in your analysis because you will realize that even the best laid plans sometimes fall completely short. So to get the best mix, you have to be very real about the company's long-term growth potential, your role in achieving it, and the current liquidity necessary to run the operations. It should also be realized that equity needs to be distributed. You cannot distribute 110% and having your cap table recalculated such that your 5% turns into 1% in order to make room for the newly hired head of technology is rather demotivating for the team. Equity should be used to entice a valuable person to join, stay, and contribute. It should not be used in leu of salary that allows an employee to pay their bills. So, like a lot of questions, the answer is really, it depends. Analyzing the true picture of your long-term potential will allow you to more easily determine the correct mix.Darwin HansonDH
-
Business partner I want to bring on will invest more money than me, but will be less involved in operations, how do I split the company?
Cash money should be treated separately than sweat equity. There are practical reasons for this namely that sweat equity should always be granted in conjunction with a vesting agreement (standard in tech is 4 year but in other sectors, 3 is often the standard) but that cash money should not be subjected to vesting. Typically, if you're at the idea stage, the valuation of the actual cash going in (again for software) is anywhere between $300,000 and $1m (pre-money). If you're operating in any other type of industry, valuations would be much lower at the earliest stage. The best way to calculate sweat equity (in my experience) is to use this calculator as a guide: http://foundrs.com/. If you message me privately (via Clarity) with some more info on what the business is, I can tell you whether I would be helpful to you in a call.Tom WilliamsTW
the startups.com platform
Copyright © 2025 Startups.com. All rights reserved.
.JPG?1390579483)
.jpg?1416925481)