Loading...
Answers
MenuVenture Capitalists: How do you deal with companies that are cashflow positive in your portfolio but will never be acquired/IPO?
Let me be more specific: you have to close the fund and give the money back to the LPs. Out of all the companies that you invested in, there are some that are cash flow positive but don’t have tremendous growth and there is no possibility to sell the company, and for sure they will not go IPO. I am talking about a situation in which it is clear that it's a lifestyle business and the founders probably want it that way. They don’t want to play the VC game anymore. A situation in which the alternative is receiving dividends for the next 15 years to get your money back. How do you deal with this situation?
Answers
I think you're looking at the low hanging fruit rather than digging for the gold that is surely inside these goldmine companies...
What I recommend is to advise all of these startups is to master internet marketing. It's the one skill set that once mastered, can and should give rise to new business strategies that can achieve that which you really want, which is an exit at 10x - 100x whatever their current valuation is...
Literally ask them and their teams to spend 4 hours a day minimum learning about internet marketing, starting with the fundamentals, the pirate metrics...
AARRR - google it if you don't what these are....
Have all your startups declare these metrics, then have them focus on ONE of these metrics, set a goal that is achievable but shows real progress. Give them a goal for every quarter...
And don't worry about anything other than these startups meeting these pass/fail goals
A slow growth company with stubborn founders is very frustrating and all too common; I've been an investor with a couple of these and it's like pushing a boulder up hill - they often just don't get it.
However, companies likes these often have unlocked assets within them that should be set free. If the founders own a majority it's difficult because they want to continue to control the company and keep their salary/lifestyle going. They also just lack the DNA to accept risk and challenge. Sometimes their goals get scaled back due to fear, etc.
A couple of things I try to explain:
1. Running a business at no or low growth is very precarious - it's hard to keep it from slipping into negative growth and losing that salary and value.
2. Let others share the risk of failure, hire outsider that can try something new without risking the entire business. I've taken this role many times with pretty good results.
3. Sometimes the problem is that the founders don't want any change that would make them look weak. Subconsciously they will let the company fail before they'll let someone else look better than them at building their business. In this case there isn't much hope, just walk away.
The bottom line is that venture funds are supposed to have a few of these, counter balanced by big winners. That's the game - focus on the winners.
Related Questions
-
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
-
What is a good/average conversion rate % for an e-commerce (marketplace model) for customers who add to cart through to purchase order.
There is quite a bit of information available online about eCommerce conversions rates. According to a ton of sources, average visitor-to-sale conversion rates vary from 1-3%. This does not mean the Furniture conversions will be the same. The bigger problem is that visitor-to-sale conversions are not a good data point to use to measure or tune your eCommerce business. All business have some unique friction factors that will affect your final conversion rate. It's very important to understand each of these factors and how to overcome them. The best way to measure and optimize is to take a conversion funnel approach. Once you have defined your funnel you can optimize each conversion rate to better the total effect. For example: Top of the funnel: - All web site visitors, 100,000 / month First conversion: View a product page, 50% of all visitors Second Conversion: Add to Cart, 10% of people who view products Final Conversion: Complete Checkout, 80% of people who put items in a cart In this example we see that only 10% of people who actually view products put them in to a cart, but 80% of those people purchase. If you can figure out why visitors are not adding items to their cart and fix the issue to increase the conversion rate, revenue should increase significantly because of the high checkout rate. You can use free tools like Google Analytics to give you a wealth of information about your site visitor and their behavior or there are some great paid tools as well.Dan MartellDM
-
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
-
What is a better title for a startup head....Founder or CEO? Are there any pros/cons to certain titles?
The previous answers given here are great, but I've copied a trick from legendary investor Monish Pabrai that I've used in previous startups that seems to work wonders -- especially if your company does direct B2B sales. Many Founders/ CEOs are hung up on having the Founder/ CEO/ President title. As others have mentioned, those titles have become somewhat devalued in today's world -- especially if you are in a sales meeting with a large organization. Many purchasing agents at large organizations are bombarded by Founders/ CEOs/ Presidents visiting them all day. This conveys the image that a) your company is relatively small (the CEO of GM never personally sells you a car) and b) you are probably the most knowledgeable person in the organization about your product, but once you land the account the client company will mostly be dealing with newly hired second level staff. Monish recommends that Founder/ CEOs hand out a business card that has the title "Head of Sales" or "VP of Sales". By working in the Head of Sales role, and by your ability to speak knowledgeably about the product, you will convey the message that a) every person in the organization is very knowledgeable about the ins and outs of the product (even the sales guys) and b) you will personally be available to answer the client's questions over the long run. I've used this effectively many times myself.Vijay Rao, CFA, FRMVR
-
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.
