The Axios article[1] is better because it notes that later investors had preferential terms ("preference stack"). It's also says the post-money valuation was around $440m.

It's hard to know what they got back, but since the preference stack is noted I'd guess they made between 120% and 150%. There's no real way to know though - but we can tell they made their money back because the sale went though.

Also, A D round isn't looking for huge returns. They probably would have been outstandingly happy with 3x, so 1.2x is fine for them.

[1] https://www.axios.com/general-assembly-1523667905-ce940016-1...

Exactly. It's very hard to make any definitive statements about this without knowing all the deal terms and those will most likely never become public.

I don't know how much equity they got for that, and without that exact information and the rest of the terms it is hard to know for sure how much they made. There are always lots of stories around an investment of this size but rarely is the real data out in the open. And I'm pretty sure of that because I know the details of some deals and those details are wildly different from the speculation in the press.

Some hints: the later investors likely had the best terms (they almost always do), they were most likely also in a position to block the deal if they did not make at least a certain ROI, they likely had liquidation preferences detailing exactly under what circumstances they would have to agree to a deal that was unfavorable to them and what the other shareholders would have to give up in compensation.

Sometimes you’ve got to double down to see the initial investment pay off. Depends who was in on the round, but a good investor who follows through to help get the outcome is a special kind of partner.