What is the best way for our company to raise funds? How much can we expect to raise?

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.

Very little. At the angel/seed stage, they're investing in the founders, so there's no expectation of patents, etc... They might check that you're incorporated in good standing, and ensure you have a solid startup/corporate lawyer, and have good employment and IP ownership agreements with your staff and contractors, and that's about it.

The more important first impressions to leave a VC with are: 1) That you both are credible and inspire confidence that you can execute the plan you're fundraising on. 2) That there is good chemistry and a great relationship between the two of you; 3) That you can adequately address the concerns/objections/questions the VC raises. The CEO is expected to do most of the talking because the CEO should be the best person in the company at articulating the vision and value of the product and company you're building. If your CTO is comfortable presenting part of the pitch, it would be ideal for the CTO to speak to the product slides. The most important thing is for the CTO not to be a "bump on the log" meaning that you don't want them sitting there for most of the presentation with nothing to say. If you feel that's the case, you really shouldn't bring your CTO. Most VC meetings will not get technical and under the hood. Each question answered should be answered by the person best qualified to speak to that question. You should make eye-contact with your partner and use subtle body language to find a way to cue the other person to speak to that question or simply offer "CTO, would you like to answer that?" Bottom line, make sure that the CTO can speak confidently enough about the product and vision, otherwise -unless specifically asked by the VC - come alone. Fundraising is a big distraction to building and a good VC will always respect that in a first meeting, the CTO can be excused from attending in priority of building product. Happy to talk to you both on a call about helping get you feeling a bit more confident and prepared before your meeting. I was formerly a VC associate for a $500m fund and have raised money from VCs as a serial entrepreneur.

We have used Fundable.com successfully for two rounds of financing both oversubscribed. Here is what I can tell you. Basic info: Fundable.com's platform connects accredited investors to startups seeking investment capital. Startups have a public facing profile that includes general information about the companies product, team, press accolade, etc. If you are raising funds claiming SEC Reg D 506(b) the public profile has no information about your securities offering. If an interested investor wants to view more information about your startup and or your offering, he/she would request access to your full profile. The investor must self accredit on the Fundable site before they are allowed to view your non-public profile. The startup is notified and you have the opportunity to conduct some due diligence on the investor (LinkedIn) and elect to invite them into your deal. Your private page includes the offering (terms). All communication from this point is done outside of the platform, meaning you have the investors email address ( a good thing to have). Fundable charges startups a flat monthly fee to post a profile on the site. In addition you can opt for additional services (help) with your campaign. For a flat fee, Fundable will assign resources to help build your profile, consult with you on your raise, and assist with PR or Marketing. This includes a blast to their investor base of over 40K if my memory serves me correctly. I am sure it is higher today. Our experience: For our first round on Fundable, we elected to use the premium service. Fundable did a great job in helping with our profile. We received 50+ views per day (quite often 100+) and on days we were included in their newsletter we received 200+ views. 10 - 20% of views requested access to our full profile. and 10-20% of those responded to my request for a call. Our close rate was very high. Both of our rounds were oversubscribed in less than 4 months taking averaging $50K per investor. These are high quality investors that have not created additional work (outside of normal investor updates). Many of our investors regularly share news and information about our industry. Several have re-invested in subsequent rounds. Disclaimer: Our startup is in the consumer hardware space which I believe tends to attract high net worth individuals. Obviously results may vary, thus I cannot speak to how well a SaaS play would do crowdfunding in general. Fundable.com's premium services offering may have changed since our campaign. I am not affiliated with Fundable.com. In fact we have been successful on other crowdfunding sites as well. In Closing: I am a proponent of crowdfunding in general. It is disrupting angel investing, providing investors with greater deal flow and exposing startups to an exponentially larger audience, increasing their chances to get in front of investors who understand and appreciate that company's solution and opportunity. Most importantly it is moving capital and driving innovation! Keep in mind, securities laws have changed and continue to change due to the Jobs act of 2012. Before you offer any securities to local investors or choose to try crowdfunding, you should consult with an attorney, and take the time to learn and understand what regulations apply to your circumstances.

You are right that the range is wide. You need to figure what are good values to have for your category. Also, you can focus on the trend (is your DAU/MAU increasing vs decreasing after you make changes) even if benchmarking is tough. Unless your app is adding a huge number of users every day (which can skew DAU/MAU), you can trust the ratio as a good indication of how engaged your users are. For games, DAU/MAU of ~20-30% is considered to be pretty good. For social apps, like a messenger app, a successful one would have a DAU/MAU closer to 50%. In general most apps struggle to get to DAU/MAU of 20% or more. Make sure you have the right definition of who is an active user for your app, and get a good sense of what % of users are actually using your app every day. Happy to discuss what is a good benchmark for your specific app depending on what it does.