VC

unlock0

When venture capital buys assets at a loss to drive up prices lol.  In 2021-2022 everything not nailed down was getting gig'd, VC'd, or outright stolen. Buying up used cars and housing for overmarket didn't matter because the money was free and inflation made up for finance costs in months. Now.. I'm not sure what's going on, all that free money still floating around I guess. The record will stop for some of these non profitable companies.

Hacking_the_Gibson

Seriously. People saying this is bearish because Apple is "out of ideas" literally do not comprehend how much money $110B is. Sequoia Capital has $85B under management. One of the most successful VC firms of all time, and they are bigger by $25B. Mind you, Sequoia built up to $85B over the past like 50 years. There are seriously not that many private business ideas worth putting more than $50M into at any given point. If you're just spraying money around, you're wasting it.

JangoDjarin

People start startups with VC or borrowed money. Borrowing rates are too high, so there are less startups to choose from. These buybacks also protect companies from malicious short sellers.

Commercial_Method278

I feel like it’s 50/50. Some are like ex VC guys who are absolute chads. Others are textbook Andy’s 

but_why_doh

Just taking this response from elsewhere, as INTC is one of the most talked about stocks recently ntel is a play on the growth in demand for CPUs in the near future. Even without their fabs, they still sell one of the highest margin, most profitable product on the planet. The problem is, less people are currently upgrading and less servers/data centers are interested RIGHT NOW. Most companies upgrade on a time table, and with high interest rates and a slowdown in VC funding, a lot of tech companies are choosing to hold on with their current tech lineup. That combined with the fact Intel hasn't released any major CPU upgrades since the end of 2022(13th gen) means less people are overly eager to upgrade. Now, this is likely to change. People will begin to upgrade again, especially once 15th gen comes out, and eventually servers are gonna need new chips. This will be the primary revenue driver for the next few years, and should bring the company up to peak revenue and profit during 2021. As for the fab side of the business, I really don't get what people are all up in arms about. The fab business has always operated at a loss, because it's there to support the chipmaking side of the business. Now that they're choosing to report fab losses independently of total chipmaking revenue, everyone's all up in arms about the losses. I don't see anyone talking about how Micron loses billions every year on their fabs. Long term, the fab business could be strong, but this again depends on your confidence in current leadership. I personally think Pat Gelsinger is a great CEO that can capably turn this company into a great one, much like he did with VMWare. No one had any hope that Lisa Su would be able to turnaround AMD, but here we are. In my opinion, this is a good play. It's a Monish Pabrai "High uncertainty, low risk" type play. The Capex has always been fairly high, and it's looking like it's starting to come down. The company isn't gonna die, regardless of the US government intervention. They're still fairly dominant in CPU sales, and are making impressive advancements in graphics and edge computing.

ConfusedAndHopefulPM

**CURRENT SITUATION** * **Biodata**: 25. USA. * **Income**: $220K ($185K + $\~35K stocks + bonus per year). * **Current Savings + Goals**: I have around \~250K saved and would like to reach $1M by 30 (also plan on increasing normal income significantly to reach that goal, but not planning on doing anything significant with it). I am fine with my lifestyle without a need to upgrade at all (other than travel which is factored in my budget) for the next 5-6 years. I don't plan on having kids and my gf makes the same amount and doesn't need support. * **Immediate Goals:** Maybe in 10 years when I'm thinking of buying a house. * **What is your risk tolerance:** Pretty risk averse other than Crypto. I am open to being more risk friendly for the right investment option at a relatively long timeframe (10+ years) * **Portfolio:** ETFs ($4K), Crypto ($600), Individual Stocks ($1K), Bonds ($1K), REIT ($500) (per month). (Very simple investment strategy, biweekly recurring investments in each of the stocks through Robinhood along with 3 existing 401Ks and 1 Roth IRA account. I will create an HSA when I'm off of my parent's insurance and max that out at $3.5K a year). * **Debt:** 0 debts. **ASK FOR THE GROUP** * **Question 1:** Should I buy a house or another large asset sooner to grow my income? I live in an apartment and don't want to leave (rent is 1750 and I love the location). Was thinking of renting it out as a vacation home or doing something like https://belonghome.com/). What would the returns/costs be for something like this on average? * **Question 2:** Is it worth talking to a private wealth management advisor like JP Morgan or Merril Lynch? I've had some DM me but I don't think they're the brightest and feel like it's a scam. What are the returns with groups like these and is it worth? * **Question 3:** Is there anything more I could be doing with my current savings/investing to reach that goal? I play it pretty safe and don't really check my portfolio except once every 6 months and was wondering if there's anything more I could do. * **Question 4:** As a follow up to 1 what size of a vacation property should I invest in for a good return? How much down should I typically put in it? * **Question 5:** There are some houses I'm looking at near where I live for \~$2-2.5 million that I think would be sick to live in some day. How much down should I be expecting to save for and how can I maximize the "equity" that I have in such a place? I've been reading about this a little bit where it's actually advantageous to have debt funding in a place where if the property appreciate the equity you initially had will appreciate as well, but that's my very limited understanding of how that works. * **Question 6:** What about peer to peer lending? I used to lend money for weed in college and collect interest but not sure how this works in the real world. Any platforms/advice for this? Or real estate crowdfunding? (Not sure how either works or returns/costs). * Question 7: Anybody had experience with VC investing? I know I have to be an accredited investor ($1M net worth+) for some of these funds but thought [https://www.angellist.com/rolling](https://www.angellist.com/rolling) could be cool. Happy to hear any advice about this/other investment opportunities. **TLDR:** * I want to **have** **$1M** saved **by** **30**. I **save around $8K** a month ($7K goal but last 6 months has been higher \~$8K) and plan to significantly grow my income as well. I'm thinking **a house could be a surefire way** to do it but **not sure how much to put down** and the best way to do this. Also **happy to listen to other, better investment ideas** for my risk profile (kind of **risk averse and hands off** but **willing to change for the right opportunity**).

code_x_7777

Well, I wouldn't like to buy his VC crypto shitcoin bags for sure.

SoaringRedCarpet

VC's companies are not publicly traded. There is pretty much 0 disclosure requirements, and it's also very unlikely you'd get the opportunity to put your own money down.

TheMemeChurch

Dude this thread has 65 comments and a lot of users have posted more than once. There is zero hype on WSB right now when compared to the upside that this could have. The past two weeks everyone has been memeing 'just say AI, stock go up' and Altman is the big boss of AI and is a huge player in the VC world.

ivandegtiar

Hey I’m curious if you did find some solution. I’m SexTech founder and I can confirm that raising any $ from VC is hard thing for SexTech/SexWellnes industry

xseodz

Every single time I look at a company, at any point in history I go. Huh. Surely that's the limit, like they can't make another trilly. And they do. Like Nvidia. If you told me they had billions left in runway thanks to AI I wouldn't have believed you. But people keep buying GPUs for AI for their VC funded venture, and the VCs that funded them are invested hard in Nvidia. It's a circle that doesn't stop.

brown_burrito

A friend referred me to a financial advisor when I was in my 20s and working in PE (there were restrictions on where I could invest etc.) Since then I’ve had many careers (management consulting, Wall St., tech, my own VC fund etc) and many life changes (got married, got divorced, lived in a bunch of different countries, got married again, had kids etc.) My financial advisor has been a rock through all those years. He’s just been incredible. So it boggles my mind when people badmouth an entire industry when there are incredible advisors out there.

TheMemeChurch

Long stocks and will join the shareholder vote. Had some calls and picked up more today, as well buying back short calls I had written. Pumped af for this. If DJT can moon the way it did with a sheister at the helm, there’s no way this won’t generate buzz after the merger. Altman isn’t Elon he’s the real deal in the Silicon Valley VC scene. He already has shitloads of money he doesn’t need to run a SPAC to make a quick buck. Writing is on the wall for me.

newyearnewaccountt

What else would they invest in, exactly? Real estate income is taxed as income and real estate holdings are also subject to capital gains tax, so that's not it. Private equity / VC have the same problem. Dividends are taxed as income so moving to dividend heavy portfolios like REITs is also out. Not much would change, honestly, because there's just no where else to put your money once you have maxed out the traditional IRA/401k/HSA/529 things.

Ol_Maxxie_Solt_DB

As someone who only invests in biotech stocks, I always remind fellow investors of a simple truth: you own businesses, not technologies. Many get swept up in the hype and storytelling of emerging technologies without focusing on the commercial strategy or probability of success (a term specific to drug developers but it could be generalized for "growth" stocks). Many emerging companies don't have one. That's because what's needed to be a successful VC-backed startup isn't what's needed to be a commercially-viable business. Too often, the vanity metrics are prioritized. Wall Street doesn't care about those, though. Or not over meaningful time periods anyway. The good news is many investors make these mistakes when starting out, myself included. Who doesn't want quantum computing or solid state batteries or synthetic biology to make our world better? It's natural. But you're not a VC. Don't try to invest like one -- that's not how public markets work. The better news is the pain you feel is one of the most valuable drivers for learning as an investor. Every industry has specific metrics that matter. Learn the context and nuance of an industry you're interested in. You'll develop better pattern recognition over time. Not everyone has the time, but if you can also learn how to model businesses you'll be even more successful as an investor because it can help to take the emotions out of it. Emotions are often what crushes returns.

vinceoffershlomi

Barrier to entry is high. A large userbase is required to retain users, kind of a catch 22. Tinder worked at first because it was a way to easily find hookups, but they also had a lot of VC investment at outset to establish their userbase, giving them a buffer from the lean years. Once they got big enough they switched to algorithms and pay to play, and got bought by match group. Unless there is a large VC fund that wants to bet on starting a new dating app, i don't think we'll see any movement in this space

greytoc

I would be surprised if individual investors use expert networks. The few times that I do them, it seems like they are either (1) PE/VC investors; (2) product managers seeking insights; or (3) sales strategy seeking to refine their pitch.

hahyeahsure

right but 0% for every regarded idea VC funds give billions to is kosher

Chonan_Akira

I am not familiar with Victory Capital but your account was probably transferred to them from USAA. Are you content with keeping your account with VC and just picking better Funds/ETFs? This sub likes Fidelity, Vanguard, Schwab the best.

UnhappyReach

I can't respect any charlatan. He was an ok VC but him stealing credit for other people's creations is too much. 

captainbling

Maybe he is maybe he isnt. gotta remember there are millions of venture capitalists and by statistics, 7 of every million VC are gunna get heads 17x in a row. Maybe he has a gift tell by the spin what side it’ll land on but it hard to say for sure. Realistically there are gunna be successful VCs that get it right 3 times and look like champs.

betadonkey

He put a lot of major investment into Tesla because he’s a venture capitalist and that is what venture capitalists do. They put together funding rounds for startups, act as a liaison between the company and big money, and throw in some money themselves to add credibility. Nobody would deny Elon is a great VC - and part of his greatness in that arena stems from his ability to sell everything he does as being so much more than it is which gets people to open their pockets. Think of all the language shifts people apply to Elon that they don’t use for other VC’s. He’s not an investor, he’s a founder. He didn’t take an equity stake in a company, he poured his life savings into it. Etc, etc. Once upon a time he was very good at that job, but there was also a whole bunch of self-mythologizing that went along with it. Maybe charlatan is too strong, but he’s at least charlatan-adjacent.

IDrinkUrMilksteak

Great. Now ban Invitation Homes, Progress Residential, Pretium, Tricon Residential, Blackstone, American Homes 4 Rent, FirstKey Homes and a dozen others backed by hedge funds and VC from buying up huge swaths of homes for sale and essentially permanently removing them from the existing home sales pool so they can rent them back to us at exorbitant prices. This is also more about eliminating foreign interest versus protecting the consumer.

cryptocorrection69

I have a feeling it will be a VC firm, not a company that we could potentially profit from sadly

timbredesign

My perspective is that this is a bubble plain and clear. That's irregardless of where tech might be headed. Or whether it'll reach this valuation again in the future, based on reasonable valuations instead of hype like it is now. The current business applications of said current AI tech are not nearly as far reaching as the speculators are hyping. I'm saying that in terms of real near term economic changes. The deeper efficiencies that are possible with AI will take longer than a year or two, I'm guessing more than 5 (at least in terms of applying it to major manufacturing lines, financial institutions and the like). Right now we're just seeing surface level changes and mostly it's a design iteration phase. As far as I see there are too many unknowns for large businesses to integrate it as a part of their foundation. So it's mostly speculation based right now. On top of that the VC funding is beginning to dry up as interest rates hold steady, because the possible payout aren't there. Inflation just isn't going to miraculously dissolve in the near or mid term like mainstream media was suggesting. Based on that I expect to see a fair amount of instability and insolvency in the coming year or two in the space, not to mention others. Tldr, bigger picture stuff takes time.

Big_Worry1509

Based community, 50ppl + in VC. This is a gem

kalakesri

Canada budget making failed VC bros mad on Twitter  starting to like Trudeau

986fan

Thinking of creating an ai powered crypto to exchange NFTs in the metaverse. Did I use enough buzzwords to get VC funding?

GrodyToddler

Yeah but remember when Sam Bankman-Fried played League of Legends during a VC meeting? Look what a genius businessman he turned out to be. Boom. Headshot. Video games are big business.

Kyrtt

It's interesting that's for sure. They have a list of VC companies on their front page and I can't find youtse listed on the VC company pages https://a16z.com/portfolio/ That's a good example, Andreessen Horowitz is on the youtse.com page, however they are not listed in the a16z portfolio at all. company claims to have been running since 2017, yet it's domain was created end of 2023 Creation Date: 2023-10-24T10:10:56.00Z def feel it's a scam site

Famous_Ic

AI is just a buzzword that developers throw around to impress VC’s and investors.

TheGRS

Yep, and if that doesn't already sound risky in terms of time and effort, just also realize that most start-ups, even the ones that look very promising, still fail to pay out much unless you are a founder. Sometimes it happens, but it seems like most founders and VC firms have gotten wise on limiting the distribution of shares. One company where I worked (that I even did pretty well on when the payday came) refused to reveal their outstanding shares to employees when asked, since they didn't need to. We only found out what the share was when the official buy-out happened. One interesting anecdote: the lawyer we had on payroll and largely in charge of the legal side of this stuff had a huge share compared to other employees, on par with the founders, and he didn't even join until several years in. So your 10,000 shares might end up being like a pretty tiny payday.

SaneLad

What is this shit? A publicly traded VC fund?

Beautiful-Parsley-24

Generally, there are only three ways to get money back from a private company (1) dividends (2) buybacks and (3) selling to a third party (often called the secondary market). Your options will be limited or guaranteed by a document called a "share purchase agreement" or "shareholder's agreement" that you'll sign when you buy the stock. These documents can be very complex. If the company **is** desperate for money they may sell you special shares which guarantee you dividends. If the company **isn't** desperate for money then they won't offer you such guarantees. Options 1 & 2 are controlled by the board of directors while option (3) will be governed by your shareholder agreement. I've passed on joining many startups because they wouldn't give me option #3. There is something called a "Derivative suit". It's a very complex and expensive legal process, but if you can prove that board of directors/executives acted grossly negligent, beyond the point of mere bad business judgement, you can sue them to force (1), (2) or (3). You can expect to pay at least $100,000 to attempt to force a derivative action. Plus, it'll get you blacklisted by most silicon valley VC firms from ever investing in one of their private company's again.

ceskanda

PE/VC, I’m an emerging crossover investor

greytoc

It depends on the company. A venture backed company is likely unprofitable, so it won't be distributing dividends as u/GotPerl mentioned. The prospects of a liquidity event where the company goes public or be acquired is never guaranteed. The failure rates can be high - so typically a smaller investor would seek a feeder fund who feeds into a VC or PE fund - as u/i_like_my_dog_more mentioned. However - if you are talking about small income-based businesses who need capital - it's possible to invest in debt and be paid back interest. The risk of default is a lot higher so the interest may be higher as well. This is not an equity investment so you dont' hold shares. But this type of investing requires some expertise in the types of companies being invested.

i_like_my_dog_more

> There is a reason you have to be an accredited investor in the US to do private investment. Also adding that angel investing, VC, and private equity are generally numbers games. If you invest into 10 things, 5 will fail, 3-4 may return your investment. The remaining one or two will do well and offset the losses of the rest. A single private investment is a losing game.

dr_kmc22

Lower rates mean more investment and long term innovation and growth. But for big tech monopolists, they aren't really taking loans or getting VC investment. So increased pricing power is good for their short term profits. Also less VC funding means less disruption and competition. Big tech goes burr.

creemeeseason

Yeah. VC has basically been subsidizing ever for 15 years. Now they want money!

kbenti

Because Tech Hype usually gets all of the VC Funding and attention. He is saying long term persistence and growth is better than having a buzzworthy name for a few months. Think of years instead of months when you're building a product. Think of several development cycles instead of knocking it out of the park on your first try. Patience is the turtle beating the Hare.

arBettor

Yeah, that's one reason I prefer Private Shares. Why pay VC costs to buy public companies? I can buy COIN and TSLA myself for no commission or management fee. But not much has changed there during 1Q - mostly just TSLA falling off. It seems strange to sell a "VC" fund after one quarter based on how the public companies traded. I hope you didn't buy DXYZ with the ARK proceeds, because that would just be hopping out of the frying pan and into the fire.

cvrdcall

Did I say I was a VC?🤡

MellieCC

Saw your edits and additions, first of all it’s Silicon Valley not silicone. I literally know a lot of prominent VCs there, and I can promise you they haven’t all gone to zero and I have literally no idea what you’re talking about, this is nuts. Peter Thiel, VC and investor of Facebook? Billionaire. There are too many to name honestly. Just, bye this convo is ridiculous

Thehealthygamer

Seems like a way to get invested in companies that non VC investors don't have access to and that seems attractive. But looking over their holdings the only one that jumps out at me is OpenAI.

thrwaway0502

$167M isn’t necessarily a huge bet. He might just like the cashflow and margin profile. Berkshire isn’t a VC, they value predictable underwriting and reliable performance over swinging for home runs

fuji_ju

When they run out of VC yes. Also they just purchased the EM4 fab firm Goich & Housego, and that fab has a reputation of being pricy.

Flat-Shallot3992

no as soon as Banks can handle dispensary money without worry of of the feds expect multi-million dollar VC investments. >Most are losing money YoY absolutely not true.

pepesilviafromphilly

Ah VC funding....how we peasants get the our share of capital gains of other people.

Bodoblock

I know I'm very much in the minority but I find food delivery prices largely reasonable. I know customers have been conditioned to see it as a cheap service due to years of VC funding, but it is inherently an expensive proposition. Having someone drive, pick up your food, and drop it off at your door has a meaningful cost. Estimating it takes 25 minutes of time, on average, it should cost at least $6 - $9 (depending on your market) to make it worth someone's time. Then you have to account for the operating costs, which are not unsubstantial, and therein lies the full accounting. It's a luxury, not a right. And it's being priced accordingly as a luxury.

BoldestKobold

> How does a small company with very few customers lose $58 million in one year? Sounds like a bit of a scam. Massive payouts to insiders with unearned contracts. Same as any startup that is happily burning through VC money, with founders leading lavish lifestyles before the inevitable crash and burn.

subtle_asian_boiy

That's basically what VC does, and generally you will need to be considered a "sophisticated investor" to be eligible for that. The last I checked you will need an AUM of $1M or making $200k+ p.a. (300k if joint with a spouse) to be eligible.

LiquefactionAction

Take it with a grain of salt since I think I heard it on WSB first, but apparently the waits for cybertruck are actually really short because demand isn't there anymore. If you want one right now, you can probably get it in under a quarter at most. elon waited way too long to roll it out, if he had it ready during the VC Unicorn Hype-era of the late 2010s, maybe even by covid, they probably would have sold like hot cakes. the moment is over now

SomebodyElseKnows

😆 May it's a VC thing. Surprised the bank is fine with it. Feels like yoloing your private school loans on a friends 💡because you can get 3% until they fail. You'd need some amazing returns to offset all the defaults.

chopsui101

She invests like a VC or a PE but in an ETF which generally hasn't preformed well. But to her credit she does say that her time horizon is like 5 years or something. You have to decide if she is grifting you or making sense.

the_leviathan711

You're not intentionally taking lesser gains, you're just not performance chasing. [Check out the 2000s](https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&sl=4BiTD0jLhaED7FoqUDrv03) - it's a decade where both bonds and international equity outperformed the SP500. Obviously the last 15 years the SP500 has outperformed international equities and bonds, but there is no reason to assume that will last forever. It's entirely possible that you are missing out on buying international stocks and small cap stocks for cheap at the moment and you'll have to buy into them later after the price has run up. Or feel free to consider [SP500 vs. Small Cap Value vs. Emerging Markets](https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&sl=5F96acvq7lUUSsUp276VC9) for the last 25 years. That's a lot of gains you miss out on by only buying large cap US stocks! At least SPY is a real strategy though, QQQ is not - it's just a random basket of stocks that happens to have had a very good run lately. It's like the basic definition of performance chasing.

alfredrowdy

VC sucks up all of the small cap gains and they don't IPO until they are mid or large cap. You would never be able to buy a stock like 80s Microsoft, 90s Amazon, or 00s Google today because VC holds onto them through f/g/h rounds.

gnocchicotti

Dude went to one VC firm looking to sell equity at 20B valuation. VC said 5B - but they would pay at 20B if FTX got someone else to pay at 20B. And he basically pulled it off because valuations are made up and he knew it. Best part - they didn't even need capital, they just needed a valuation on the books so they could use the FTX stake (tokens) as collateral for more regarded YOLOs inside Alameda. Don't talk no shit, dude is 💯 one of us

ravepeacefully

Jeff bezos has a 90k salary and is worth over 100 billion. That’s not really a relevant fact. Her husband was a millionaire VC. Did you hear this news from tim Dillon?

Acoconutting

**TL/DR** \- > They simply believe in their own bullshit. ​ I run a finance department and work foe entrepreneurs / rich people. There's a lot of interesting mental gymnastics that goes on. They get into a mentality that like - getting the money is right. Whatever the story is that somehow sells their story, their idea, their whatever is right. It couldn't be wrong. How could it be wrong? They're rich and successful and of course they are right and bla bla. In truth, these people started on third base. They all went to private high schools and their dads were someone or they knew people with money or their best friends had a path groomed to wherever - fancy college, seed money, VC, etc. I often have discussions with them, nearly daily - and plan strategy and compensation and people and M&A and etc etc.... The truth is...they literally block out and refuse to accept things they don't like. This doesn't mean they don't work hard - or at least spend a lot of time working or "working". It just means...their entire end game is crafting rationale to defend the status quo because the status quo is really good to them. The idea of fiduciary responsibility isn't with them - It's the auditors. If they couldn't do it - why would the banks let them. If they whatever, why didn't the people they hired tell them otherwise, if they.... Often times....they were told...repeatedly. They simply blocked out whatever they were told, and refused to accept it, and then started trying to think about how to get around it - because that's "entrepreneurship" and etc. But they've had literally no ***real*** accountability in their lives. They've never been told no. They've always had money. They enter into a very narcissistic feedback loop where the people around them are rewarded by playing into the loop. This also doesn't mean every one of them is "bad". I work with some nice generous rich people who do the same thing. Their "like" might be "get rich together with my friends" - they have a REALLY easy time doing things they like, and they have a REALLY hard time doing things they don't like - probably because they were never told no in their lives. Even really basic shit like - Showing up to the same meeting at the same time weekly - If you're rich and in power and rather just randomly call people whenever things come to your brain....that's going to be the culture of the company.

fourestgump69

I don’t get it either - thinking it’s probably similar to an IPO where it’s getting bid up or and this is me high on hopium investors believe it’s undervalued bc it’s currently holding 23 of its potential 100 VC backed companies. It’ll either fill up w quality or shitcos. Cool idea either way, I’m willing to roll some dice.

Any_Angle_5815

I (44M) am a single parent of two kids who are wholly financially dependent on me. I do not (currently) live in the US. I have $314K to invest in the US stock market. I wish to grow this money as best (fast?) as possible. * I do not need to split my corpus 60:40 in equities:bonds, since I have other investments outside of the US that complete my portfolio. * I am investing $50K out of this in an early stage VC fund. I have known the Principal of this fund for 20+ years and feel confident about the fund's strategy. * I have invested the balance in VOO, VTI, VUG and QQQ. I am unable to decide the ratio between these ETFs (which is the motivation for this post). Should it be VOO:VTI:VUG:QQQ 1:1:1:1, or a little less risky 2:2:1:1? A bit of my background, since I see that this usually helps folks when making recommendations. * I am currently able to save \~$80K/year from my job. My health has progressively deteriorated in this job and I'll likely have to quit it soon. * The savings I have are enough for me to retire comfortable in my country of residence. I am currently constructing a forever home in the mountains. * The savings I have are simply not enough to send my kids to (undergraduate) college in the US, something they aspire for. That would (allegedly) cost close to $500K per child. * I also own a business that has done reasonable well for itself in the last few years. If I quit my job and put in a bit of work into it, this business would easily pay for the current living expenses of our family of three, and my individual living expenses till I retire. * The current hare-brained plan is to * Quit my job and focus on my health and my business. * Grow my savings as fast as possible so maybe it can fund my kids' educational dreams (if not two undergrads in the US, then an undergrad in Europe followed by a postgrad in the US). * If I end up losing a chunk of my corpus due to the high risk I am taking, I just go back to wage slavery and build it back up over a few years. * I do not have debts. I only need the money when I retire in 15+ years, and when my kids go to college - within the next few years. I could do something wonky like take out student loans to pay for their college, while letting my corpus grow. And at some point when the corpus outgrows the principal amount of the loan(s) I pay them off.

kimchi_station

Its because VC can make short term investments on non-profitable companies which don't actually provide any meaningful services and still make a profit by cashing out when it gets purchased or IPOs.

gnocchicotti

It's not just morons and gamblers who play a part. All of these fuckers are enabled by the system in big finance. They get VC money, they get the Forbes cover, they get the photo ops and the glowing profiles. Their investors set them up with legal, accountants, fuck they even hire people to dress them and shop around flattering softball interviews around finance media. Neumann wasn't some sneaky conman who slipped under the radar, he was just the show pony that got paraded around just one phase in an ongoing, repeatable scheme. When the companies get busted for fraud (think Nikola) the investors just step back and say "we are *shocked* that fraudulent activity is happening within this startup!" and often the CEO gets made an example of. Think SBF of FTX - he's going to jail forever, the outside investors who helped boost his profile, all the people who took piles of cash to promote for him, the outside accountants? Last I heard they're all still good. 

gnocchicotti

VCs throw money at these guys. Are they too stupid to know the companies are worthless and the financials are unfixable? Of course not. They have done their DD and have calculated that the story is good enough to have a fair probability of offloading it onto retail investors and pension funds at great profit. If they lose their VC money on 5 scams, 4 go bankrupt and 1 hits, they still make bank.

Atriev

Just hold META and stop fucking around with these shitco’s unless you’re VC.

PM_me_your_mcm

I mean I'm all for saying fuck Wall Street and "smart money" and the way that they can sort of create self-fulfilling prophecies with overwhelming leverage.  Absolutely. Buuuut ... In the past quarter they dropped NFT, which is probably smart, and they let Ryan invest cash in basically whatever he wants instead of doing stock buybacks.  So at this point they're basically a hedge fund/VC firm that sells used video game shit on the side.   Revenues are likely to be lower, none of what Ryan has done has convinced "smart money" that this is a serious venture, and where they fall on earnings feels like it comes down to how well Ryan invested in the past three months.  Which means he would be shooting for like a 13% return for the quarter.   I expect disappointment.

irate_wizard

It was only artificial in the sense that all their clients were VC investors which could read financial statements and knew there was a possibility of a run if everyone else was like them and could understand those statements.

Reddits_For_NBA

This is a fucking plant by Reddit or some VC backer don’t fall into this bullshit.

Kagenikakushiteru

I had access to this VC opportunity at 20-30c. I took some but wanted more. Bidded for more stock at 35c, but the guy reneged the deal and water 40c. Anyway it’s now $8.00 per share woot. I still made millions on the parcel I had tho

PlutosGrasp

Huh? It was already generating revenue and growing that revenue dramatically. What are you talking about? Reddit had no issue raising VC capital. https://variety.com/2021/digital/news/reddit-funding-round-10-billion-valuation-1235040079/amp/ $700m 2021. At the end of 2023 they still had a billion in cash: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1713445/000162828024012380/reddit-final424b4.htm#i1b9a579e78a34dfa99f7f26daeec195b_40 Stop making shit up.

TheDirtyDagger

Famous last words. Some VC will be using your $8500 to buy their sh*tty kid Gucci

barnz3000

This company that has NEVER made money, and relies on voluntary labour. Of which they have encouraged to buy their overpriced ridiculous IPO. This is a death sandwich, which exists purely as VC exit liquidity. And to make Spez rich.

22pabloesco22

I was around then too. And actually worked in tech as a youngin. ​ That shit ain't this. Not saying NVDA is a 1T or a 10T company, but the hype then was absurd. It was one big joke that let those that were in on it get real rich. Here's my example. Of my 20 or so newly out of college and jumping into tech jobs friends, 3/4 ended up taking jobs for companies at lesser money than I was making as a contractor by far. The carrot dangled was a large chunk of stocks. They'd pitch new hires the slide deck talking about the 3 year plan to go public. At that stage, the equity we're giving you as part of you comp plan will make you a millionare many times over. ALL those friends ended up wasting away 2-4 years of their lives with dead end companies that folded. They literally weren't making shit, just burning VC money. Fast forward to today, some of the most successful powerful companies on the planet are leading the charge on AI. SO it's not just vaporware. It's real shit, and it is being built up to be revolutionary, like it's meant to change how we live our day to day lives. Again, may or may not pan out to that extent, but lot of middle ground between vaporware and AI being the most revolutionary thing since options trading...

sbfdd

With crypto a founding team of 5 people + their VC control the premine and basically entire project. Fiat = governments print money Crypto = anyone can print money Bitcoin = no one can print money

ktaphfy

Yeah, no. VC minded president/CEO starting from McDonnell Douglas merger https://qz.com/1776080/how-the-mcdonnell-douglas-boeing-merger-led-to-the-737-max-crisis More than one + middle managers bean-counter oriented, not engineers by training, but cost cutters competing for promotion. (My interpretation of understanding as read)

BeardedMillenial

Yeah, it’s just another VC-backed exercise in really good marketing/advertising.

NonverbalKint

Holy shit imagine being this dumb. Their failures are experiments because they make so much money that they can treat themselves as both the VC and the startup. The products weren't great because the market didn't exist and if they didn't bother they're still rich. Android has 70% of the mobile phone market share, Google search has 91% of the market share. The pixel phone is one of the, if not the best, mobile phone ever made. Chrome has 65% of the market share. Microsoft bought into Open AI, they didn't innovate it, and now Apple follows suit. Microsoft automatically gets the market for corporate clients since the majority of the business world runs on SharePoint and office365, the copilot integrations as unstoppable. But when Google delivers on their consumer AI platform they will retain market dominance. Once tapped, the billions of YouTube videos and decades of delivering the most relevant content to people has the potential to completely change the web. You think the same hobby team that lit together google+ is going to be leading that charge? Hell no.

the_snook

It's entirely up to the company. How it goes is, they organise a private liquidity event i.e. find a buyer and negotiate a price, then open it up to current shareholders at their discretion. Maybe current employees get a taste, maybe they reach out to formers, maybe only institutional investors (VC and so forth) get to sell.

Wrong-Situation-7431

SOL has alot of VC investors, I wouldn't be surprised if it hits $1,000.

Jupman

VC company, They got nothing on them .

MarcatBeach

You dug much deeper than I did. I am old and my eyesight is not great. to read that stuff online takes effort. once I saw the .01 warrants being the basis of the offering and some of the parties doing it I was done. It would take more digging on the role of the VC's. the initial offering would have some of that buried in it. looks like anytime this goes up people cash out.

greytoc

I had looked through some of the Form 4 and 13f filings. Are you sure that a VC is considered an insider? I thought that VC's would be considered institutional investors and not insiders. There is at least 1 family office that I noticed. Regardless - you bring up an interesting point about the investors. One of the more interesting investors is a fund called NovaWulf Private Fund. I thought the name was coincidental and the fund probably has other relationships to both Beowulf and Terrawulf.

Salsalito_Turkey

Ah, yes, those damn "VC-funded" businesses that have been publicly traded for 22 years.

anotherbozo

This is the problem with VC funded businesses. They want never ending growth. These businesses will never be happy with being in the green with profits. They want green in growth every year which isn't sustainable.

Proper_Scholar4905

Probably day 2, but volatility will be high, and it will be at $50 on day 3. VC’s won’t let this fall before they can exit. Options writers and VC’s will win. The rest is WSB history.

Proper_Scholar4905

Last private investment was around $14-$18 a share last I checked. GL, but VC’s don’t have interest in bagholding…

dvdmaven

What can you expect when the executives have been draining the VC money for 15 years.

generouscookie1981

>Who knows what will this AI craze turn into, I wouldn't be surprised if it's a mini repeat of dot.com. Do I feel as certain about it as market ripping to new ATHs this year? No obviously. I feel much more confident about SPX and that's why I am primarily VOO. However, I am comfortable making a bet on AI because *the entirety of Silicon Valley is behind it*. When Brian Chesky, the CEO of ABNB said "The Valley stands behind Sam." He might as well have said the Valley stands behind AI. There are billions of investment and spend pouring into the space from all the big players plus TONS of money that will flow in from PE, VC, family offices that are blowing up: [Family offices have tripled since 2019, creating a new gold rush on Wall Street.](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/08/family-offices-tripled-creating-a-new-gold-rush-on-wall-street.html) >Experts say family offices now manage $6 trillion or more, and their ranks are growing. >The number of family offices in the world has tripled since 2019, setting off a new race among private equity firms, hedge funds and venture capital firms to attract their investments. There's no concrete sign at all that demand is satiating or they aren't dominant. Once there's a sign I will consider revising my thesis.

tazzy531

Used to be that startups that were valued at $1B were required to go public. Facebook was forced to go public even though they didn’t want to. This allowed public investors to take part in the growth afterwards. Nowadays, companies are staying private longer until all the growth has gone out and they can’t raise VC capital. Take for example Stripe. It’s now valued at $65B. Under the old rules, they would’ve had to go public years ago and the public would have earned the growth from $1B to $65B. Now when they go public this year(?), it’s hard to imagine that it grows 65x from here. Now with the example here with Reddit. They are going to go public at $6.4B. That’s 6x what the old rule would’ve been. As a result of this, you see less first day IPO pop. This is great for the company, insiders, early investors, and employees. But as a public investor don’t expect to make huge gains on IPOs.

BagofBabbish

If you buy on a lot of brokerages, not through a DSP, then usually they have restrictions on when you can sell. They don’t want people buying and flipping on day one, it makes them look bad as an issuer. Also you don’t need to be an insider to have a lockup. Let’s say you invested some money is a VC fund as a LP (read - you’re not on the board, you’re not receiving material inside info), you typically would have a six month lockup before you can sell your shares.

BagofBabbish

It’s not uncommon at all. If you’re a VC investor and one of the fund’s portfolio companies goes public, you’ll get a whole new account (usually at E Trade or Merrill Lynch) for every single one. What you’re talking about is how other brokerages let you use a raffle system to try to win a portion of the shares they were allocated. Totally different

Dichter2012

We should start the count when Reddit became an independent company after Conde decided to spun out Reddit again. The whole reason Reddit has to go IPO is because the VC needs the money for next round of investment. Their horizon is usually around 10 years.

bzl33

no VC is going to give them money so they have to go public

imposter22

Yeah i’m surprised Jack Dorsey didnt get investigated for the bank run… he told every big player to get their money out at that time, possibly coordinating the day to do it. He created the damn bank run… there is a conspiracy about it, but this asshat blew up twitter and all his VC friends to pull out their money at the same time. They should get his txt messages, twitter dms, and his phone records for the two weeks before the run. This dude is shady as fuck. I’ve met him, always asking what other guys have.. he is a one upper for sure. (That guy has this rare Ferrari, i need it too) no joke he is a piece of dogshit

leraning_rdear

If a VC or a company in the industry is the buyer, expect the mantra “do more with less”. Also expect profitability assessments by store and region. The bottom 10% may get shut down even if profitable. ROC is king. Good luck.

swampassOG

They have some sort of VC money pouring in before they mint. They buy and sell to themselves to create volume. Idk. Huge speculation on my part

oil1lio

ah. the VC strategy

Puzzled_Bath_984

NVidia is selling a lot of chips. Microsoft, Meta, Google, Apple all have giant piles of cash. VC investors gave piles of money to AI startups. This is all in anticipation of real revenue generating products based on AI.

generouscookie1981

I disagree but even if that's true, is this late mature TSLA or early? Is Silicon Valley, VC, PE support of AI spending going to start heading downhill from here or only ramping up? https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/1b9l1ex/rstocks_daily_discussion_fundamentals_friday_mar/ktxadek/

Heavy_Pumpkin6853

I think her husband is a VC guy by trade so she has some knowledgeable help in addition to insider info from congress.