You know those startups that sound like they're tackling a big problem (like "healthcare" or "climate change") but the thing they plan to build can only fix a tiny part of the problem, even if they executed it perfectly?
-
Show this thread
-
I find unambitious companies "boring" from a mission perspective, but guess what? Investors also find them boring from a money perspective!
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread -
Solving a "modest" problem competently gives you, like, a $200M exit. Investors can't get the returns they need unless they bet on companies that have a chance to do better than that.
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likesShow this thread -
I'm used to downplaying my ambitions to sound more "professional" and "serious", because I don't have nearly enough of a track record yet to prove I can achieve them. But I'm starting to get better responses just by telling the truth explicitly.
1 reply 0 retweets 16 likesShow this thread -
From the VC's perspective, hearing "I want to replace a $300B market" is a good sign, not because it proves you can (it doesn't), but because it distinguishes you from people who aren't even thinking of trying (which is actually a lot of founders!!!)
4 replies 0 retweets 19 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @s_r_constantin
I’m personally very allergic to any company playing up an unrealistic market size estimate. VCs know those are bullshit. But then med device investors also say things like “the TAM has to be at least $1bn or we won’t look at it” There’s a big range between $1b and $300b though
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
Good to hear the counterpoint!
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.