I'm not surprised. The default for starting a startup seems to be that you need VC funding because you need to monopolize as fast as possible and having extra cash will allow you to get there sooner than if you were to bootstrap.
What we're seeing is that growth is able to happen in spite of the frothy VC environment, not because of it. So if it is possible, then why would you have to seek funding? If you think getting VC money is good because you should get VC funding (or because getting some will get you press in TechCrunch) then you're thinking about it all wrong.
You should seek VC money if you need the money (with a very serious definition of "need"). If you don't, why would you:
* Have a boss (outside of your customers)
* Give up a board seat
* Give up control of your company (and possibly eventually a majority of that control)
If you need enough money that doing the above 3 things is less painful than basically your business dying, then yes, you should seek funding. Actually I want to emphasize the "less painful" part. Don't read this as "if your business will die otherwise, seek funding."
Sometimes you should let a business die. If family is important to you and raising VC money and working even harder to keep someone else happy will possibly end your marriage, and ending your marriage is more painful than keeping this startup alive, you should probably let the startup die.
And that's okay!
What matters is you seek VC money for a very specific reason, and it is vital for you and your business for the right reasons.
Get a business coach and extensively network - or just focus on product market fit and the connections will come. I guarantee you that will be far cheaper than the millions of dollars worth of equity you would be giving up.
I agree with the parent, raise VC money only if you absolutely need money.
Notable there is a tendency for VC's to start staffing up your company with their overpaid and under performing associates. Since you no longer have full ownership you can't fire them either. Often those guys real job is to serve as place holders for when the VC's push out you and your senior managers. So when the company is acquired they are the ones that get the retention bonuses not you.
the most important thing I've found is the marketing/press around raising itself. particularly if the VC in question is seen as selective and top tier.
that has some nice benefits around getting decent legal counsel, banking, recruiting, etc. everyone treats 'foo ventures' backed companies with more consideration by default.
otherwise..meh..most of the people they are really excited for you to meet (i.e. bring on as VP whatever), aren't that interesting. and while yes, you may get a few forced sales because you share a VC with someone, in some sense thats strictly less valuable than organic growth.
the VC is always going on about how valuable they are going to be to you...the reality is that if you aren't going to fulfill _their_ vision for your company soon enough, they will do everything they can to restructure the company so that someone else can.
You can bring in advisors - they have connections and can provide input without requiring they give you cash and in exchange they will take significantly less equity.
If you need those things it may be worth it, but as the poster lays out that benefit doesn't come free. Like everything else it's a trade-off. I would bet that most startups don't actually need those things, or at least can get them sufficiently in ways that aren't as expensive.
Most VCs will not give up a seat, and most companies have absolutely no leverage.
The overwhelming majority of startups need funding to survive, this throws off the balance of control. The only startups that can dictate funding terms are the ones that have no real need to raise. Of course there are concessions, but relinquishing a board seat is not a common one.
What we're seeing is that growth is able to happen in spite of the frothy VC environment, not because of it. So if it is possible, then why would you have to seek funding? If you think getting VC money is good because you should get VC funding (or because getting some will get you press in TechCrunch) then you're thinking about it all wrong.
You should seek VC money if you need the money (with a very serious definition of "need"). If you don't, why would you:
* Have a boss (outside of your customers)
* Give up a board seat
* Give up control of your company (and possibly eventually a majority of that control)
If you need enough money that doing the above 3 things is less painful than basically your business dying, then yes, you should seek funding. Actually I want to emphasize the "less painful" part. Don't read this as "if your business will die otherwise, seek funding."
Sometimes you should let a business die. If family is important to you and raising VC money and working even harder to keep someone else happy will possibly end your marriage, and ending your marriage is more painful than keeping this startup alive, you should probably let the startup die.
And that's okay!
What matters is you seek VC money for a very specific reason, and it is vital for you and your business for the right reasons.