Who really has the ability to see what’s the real startup valuation?

Yesterday I was listening to this interview to Bryce Roberts of Indie.vc about companies failing to raise new rounds and their real value.

Yesterday I was listening to this interview to Bryce Roberts of Indie.vc about companies failing to raise new rounds and their real value.

He states that it is a mistake just to “force” all startups to raise multiple rounds to prove their value while many others can be surprisingly successful just by growing through positive returns and then financing “post profit” rounds.

In Latin America, where funding is really scarce, this is particularly true. After more than a few deals in last 5 years, I can say that the big mistake, we in the VC industry and entrepreneurs make, is not recognizing if their businesses and market landscapes support or not a multiple financing rounds path or a more conservative approach for the startups we invest.

I feel failed companies are part of our business equation and we must accept those mistakes in our portfolios as expected.

But companies that could have done great and go down because the growth/financing strategy went wrong are for us investors and board members to blame.

Adding to what my friend Marc Penkala says in this very insightful article about the Schroedinger ‘s Valuation Problem, I really think that we as investors and board members or advisors, should be the ones to have the sight to Xray under the box and provide enough insight to tell the founders about the status of Schroedinger’s cat, before its too late, and help then define the financing strategy that betters fits their own strengths and business potential for success.