financings

Seems strange to flag such common terms as evidence that there's something strange about these high-valuation financings.

Does it participate pro-rata in future financings or does it always convert to cash at that point?

You need income to have positive cashflow (excluding financings of course) and you need cashflow to pay off debt.

They also typically give a lot of help with important hires and making introductions for financings and sometimes business deals.

Right, that's been my experience as well (seeing mostly financings of companies in the southeast US).

Today, companies try to stay private for as long as they possibly can, which has resulted in massive private financings.

We calculated a lower bound of $2.36B from a compilation of 264 financings in 2014.

I don't think that there is a correlation between convertible note seed financings and rising valuations: valuations are rising for all types of financings over the last five years.

They seem about right for Web 1.0 dot-com boom days, but looking at some of the financings on TechCrunch, recent startups (eg.

Maintaining a stake can be difficult, even with pro rata rights, because the cost of participating in future financings can be too high.

More broadly, articles like this are part of why we didn't announce our previous financings.

Looking at 2013 exits (or financings) is missing the mark.

Does anybody have any data on the percentage of Uber drivers that have financed their cars through Uber, or what the "oops, I need to get out of this mess now" terms are in those financings?

An employee often ends up paying hella AMT on almost all gain from ISOs since he didn't early exercise (or, early exercises at substantial out-of-pocket cost), and gets less freedom to sell in later financings, less return in a sub-optimal exit where the sale is covered with preference but "retention grants" are given to founders, etc.