Content pfp
Content
@
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
qw pfp
qw
@qw
Founders are worried about losing to competitors who raised more money. In actuality I’ve only seen counter-examples: Tensor beat magic Eden with 2 orders of mag less $. Solana beat other L1s with 2 order of mag less. Jupiter raised 0, all VCs passed. Less money = more sense of urgency more chip on the shoulder.
30 replies
20 recasts
222 reactions
qw pfp
qw
@qw
Typo: Solana is 1 order of mag less
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
matthewb.eth ↑ 🎩 pfp
matthewb.eth ↑ 🎩
@matthewb
nice to see you on FC @qw
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Feddas🎩 pfp
Feddas🎩
@feddas
Uh. Solana raised a ton of money. Not sure where your cherry picking your data from.
1 reply
0 recast
5 reactions
Backseats 🎩 pfp
Backseats 🎩
@backseats
If I could, I’d automatically short companies that raise too much, too early. I don’t think founders know how to handle that much money when they don’t actually need it and it almost poisons the well
1 reply
0 recast
10 reactions
↑langchain 🎩 pfp
↑langchain 🎩
@langchain
Raising too much VC capital is the impermanent loss they never told you about. Being capital efficient is concentrated liquidity and concentrated focus on success.
1 reply
0 recast
8 reactions
Grit pfp
Grit
@grit
too much money can be an overhead in and of it self and it is a distraction from solving the main thing, something people want. too much money can make you hire people who arent needed and spending money on marketing for a product that isnt sticky.
0 reply
0 recast
5 reactions
CryptoFox69 pfp
CryptoFox69
@cryptofox69
And wormhole raised 250 mil while being unusable and super inconvenient. Everyone just trying to airdrop hunt it imo.
1 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
Degen trader pfp
Degen trader
@degentrader
Getting cult followers is the key. Bypass the VCs. Give the benefit to your followers to make your project the religion. But be $JUP not $PSP.
0 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
Bullduck 🔮 pfp
Bullduck 🔮
@bullduck
Another one is Drip Haus
0 reply
1 recast
3 reactions
Danish A. pfp
Danish A.
@dajmeri.eth
The ZIRP era was the anti pattern for building a start up. Lots of lessons will be unlearned
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
LordOfWar pfp
LordOfWar
@lordofwar
Raising a lot of $$$ with the right founder in a capital or marketing intensive world can create businesses that are impossible to rebuild.
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
PezDispenser pfp
PezDispenser
@paulz
The balance sheet is a weapon in the arsenal but not a silver bullet.
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Jason — ⚪↑🎩 🧾 pfp
Jason — ⚪↑🎩 🧾
@jachian
Only major example I can think of is Chewy muscling out their bootstrapped competitor This mainly on the basis of using paid ads vs SEO and organic traffic More cases of the reverse like with Airbnb and Wimdu in Europe
0 reply
1 recast
2 reactions
Matei pfp
Matei
@no
You don’t say 😂
0 reply
1 recast
2 reactions
Mike pfp
Mike
@mike1third.eth
It lets you focus more on the most relevant part -nailing pmf
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Mike Fiuk pfp
Mike Fiuk
@michalfiuk
Agree with the concept of your post. But I wouldn't count ME out just yet
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Sodeeq pfp
Sodeeq
@kloeverse
If the project really has impact VC money is bonus... As you highlighted Jupiter, they well grounded
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
BowTiedTed pfp
BowTiedTed
@bowtiedted
Agree. You can’t throw money at all problems. The ones who raise too much money don’t get their hands dirty and solve the problems. Simple
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
mats pfp
mats
@matscol
I'm old, my cycle for all this was early web days in mid 90s, and of the people around me who got big vc funding, most were manager types who needed the money to hire builders Actual builders mostly got ignored That's why I couldnt be rooting harder for jupiter, I want to see that model take over
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions