Loading...
Answers
MenuHow can I go about raising money for my startup when the growth model is based on users and not revenue?
Answers
There's no set-in-stone formula. The answer depends on the degree to which implementing a revenue model would potentially cause a mass user exodus.
A) If implementing a revenue model would obviously cause no problems, then investors might be ok with Camp 2.
B) If a reasomable person might think that implementing a revenue model could cause a mass exodus of users from your service, then investors would not be ok with Camp 2.
Having said that, each investor is different, and there has been a steady decrease in the popularity of investing in Camp 2 startups. The popularity of Camp 2 startups fluctuates with the current strength of the economy (weaker economy = less investors willing to go with Camp 2).
I usually recommend a hybrid approach, which involves initially implementing a revenue model on at least a small scale to start testing the waters. You want to deploy this as quickly and cheaply as possible, and then scale it up, just like an MVP. You start off by exposing a potentially unrefined revenue model to just a small % (e.g. 1%) of your users to test the waters, and then slowly scale up its deployment as you improve it (based on data feedback from that first pool of users). Even if you only have time to test the 1% implementation before approaching investors, it will be better than nothing. You can use the data from that experiment to show investors that (hopefully) it didn't cause a mass exodus of that 1% of users, and you can use it to have a ballpark estimate of the revenue you could get if it was fully deployed and better implemented.
For certain unique situations, it may be important to remember that for this initial testing, the deployment of your revenue model doesn't actually have to generate revenue for yourself, it just has to have the appearance to those 1% (or whatever %) of users as your revenue model would. The most important part of this initial testing is just testing whether your revenue model will interfere with your user base. For instance, you can start by creating fake ads that don't actually generate any revenue. That may sound weird, but it was relevant to a unique situation I helped someone else with. It allowed them to save time and money to deploy their initial test. Once you have data showing that it doesn't scare users away, then you can make convincing estimates of future revenue based on your growing user base.
If you'd like more tailored advice to your specific situation let me know,
best,
Lee
An exit strategy is the greatest value driver for a startup. A strategic exit is the greatest value creator for entrepreneurs. Seek an investor that's interested in your exit strategy from "Day 1". Eg.: https://e27.co/googles-former-ma-man-asia-just-launched-new-vc-firm-20160929/
The sole purpose of a business is to make money. If that is not the case for you, then you are not building for-profit business. Days of acquiring users and raising funds solely based on the millions of eyeballs visiting the web site has passed. With SW&HW being commodity, marketing is emerging as the most expensive cost center for B2C high growth startups. Consumers are willing to pay for the service that they value, so I would focus on pricing strategy, looking for price-value equilibrium that your customer is willing to pay. Hopefully, the price point and the volume of paying customers would be financially attractive not only for you, but for an investor too. There's no way knowing where that equilibrium is until you try, refine, iterate...
Eyal Policar-DBA Agri-Business
The days of not having a reliable revenue model in place are fast dwindling. A few big VC companies are shutting down, angel investments are rare people are just not that keen. In many countries, people are looking for govt aids and grants.
Therefore the challenge is to define your ROI clearly.
Ask yourself if I had 1/2 a million $ to spare where would i put it. In real estate, a new start-up, an existing company stocks, govt bonds. Your answer should help you decide
Good luck- If you need more input drop a line
Related Questions
-
What roles should the CEO and CTO have in a VC meeting?
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.TW
-
When raising money how much of equity do you give up to keep control? Is it more important to control the board or majority of shares?
It entirely depends on the kind of business you have. If you have a tech startup for example, there are pretty reliable assumptions about each round of funding. And a business plan and financial forecasts are almost totally irrelevant to sophisticated tech investors in the early stages of a company's life. Recent financial history is important if the company is already generating revenue and in that case, a twelve-month projection is also meaningful, but pre-revenue, financial forecasts in tech startups mean nothing. You shouldn't give up more than 10-15% for your first $100,000 and from that point forward, you should budget between 10-20% dilution per each round of subsequent dilution. In a tech startup, you should be more nervous about dilution than control. The reality of it is that until at least a meaningful amount of traction is reached, no one is likely to care about taking control of the venture. If the founding team screws-up, it's likely that there will be very little energy from anyone else in trying to take-over and fix those problems. Kevin is correct in that the board is elected by shareholders but, a board exerts a lot of influence on a company as time goes-on. So board seats shouldn't be given lightly. A single bad or ineffective board member can wreak havoc on a company, especially in the early stages of a company's life. In companies outside of tech, you're likely going to be dealing with valuations that are far lower, thus likely to be impacted with greater dilution and also potentially far more restrictive and onerous investment terms. If your company is a tech company, I'm happy to talk to you about the financing process. I am a startup entrepreneur who has recently raised angel and VC capital and was also formerly a VC as part of a $500,000,000 investment fund investing in every stage of tech and education companies.TW
-
Does anyone know of a good SaaS financial projection template for excel/apple numbers?
Here is a link to a basic model - http://monetizepros.com/tools/template-library/subscription-revenue-model-spreadsheet/ Depending on the purpose of the model you could get much much more elaborate or simpler. This base model will help you to understand size of the prize. But if you want to develop an end to end profitability model (Revenue, Gross Margin, Selling & General Administrative Costs, Taxes) I would suggest working with financial analyst. You biggest drivers (inputs) on a SaaS model will be CAC (Customer Acquisition Cost, Average Selling Price / Monthly Plan Cost, Customer Churn(How many people cancel their plans month to month), & Cost to serve If you can nail down them with solid backup data on your assumption that will make thing a lot simpler. Let me know if you need any help. I spent 7 years at a Fortune 100 company as a Sr. Financial Analyst.BD
-
Is fundable.com a successful tool to help raise an equity seed round for a pre-launch startup?
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.UB
-
What is the average cost to close a round of seed funding?
I'm reluctant to say "it depends," but legal expense for a true seed round varies dramatically based on: 1. Whether the investment is structured as a priced equity round vs. convertible debt (or variations on that theme such as "SAFE") 2. Number and location of investors, timing of closing(s), and prior angel investing experience 3. Company counsel's efficiency and fluency in industry norms 4. "Deferred maintenance" necessary in areas like corporate formation, founders' equity issuance and IP assignments. #4 is the item that takes many entrepreneurs by surprise. On the investor side, it leads otherwise very savvy observers to give unrealistically low estimates of legal expense because they assume starting from a clean slate. This item is also most resistant to automation or standardization because startups come into being many different ways; each story is unique. I would put the lowest estimate at around $3K, assuming the company is already formed as a Delaware corporation with clean, basic documents, has issued founders' stock and handled related IP and other matters, and simply needs to issue a convertible note to one or two accredited investors with minimal negotiation of documents. The highest I would expect for a true "seed round" is about $15K, where some corporate cleanup is needed, the deal is structured as a streamlined kind of preferred equity (e.g., Series Seed), there are multiple closings with investors on different dates and terms, etc. Beyond that point we're really in "Series A" territory, doing things like creating a full set of VC preferred stock investment documents (about 100 pages), negotiating with investors' counsel (at the company's expense), and so forth. The expense and complexity of a traditional Series A deal have been the main impetus behind using convertible debt or Series Seed-type documents for seed-stage investments of less than $1 million or so in recent years. I hope this proves helpful. Always happy to chat and answer further questions.AJ
the startups.com platform
Copyright © 2025 Startups.com. All rights reserved.