Roka News chose profitability over further VC funding, recognizing a fundamental misalignment. Even successful news media exits, like Morning Brew's $75M sale, are considered small outcomes for VCs. This pressure for unicorn-scale returns can corrupt a news organization's mission and independence.
Related Insights
A founder reflects on leaving a fulfilling lifestyle business to chase a VC-backed venture. He attributes this to the "Silicon Valley Kool-Aid"—an industry narrative suggesting that if you aren't building a potential billion-dollar company, you lack ambition or are a "loser."
Navan's post-IPO stock drop, despite strong revenue, is a troubling sign for the venture ecosystem. It highlights that even a multi-billion-dollar outcome can be considered a 'bummer' and may not generate sufficient returns for large, late-stage funds, resetting expectations for what constitutes a truly successful exit in the current market.
Roka News founders reflect that their biggest failures occurred when they tried to copy established media models. Their greatest successes, like their on-the-ground YouTube documentaries, came from executing on their unique, original instincts, even if it took years to realize them.
Club Penguin's co-founder warns that accepting VC money creates immense pressure to become a billion-dollar company. This often crushes otherwise successful businesses that could have been profitable at a smaller scale, making founders worse off in the long run.
When a company like Synthesia gets a $3B offer, founder and VC incentives decouple. For a founder with 10% equity, the lifestyle difference between a $300M exit and a potential $1B future exit is minimal. For a VC, that same 3.3x growth can mean the difference between a decent and a great fund return, making them far more willing to gamble.
Venture capitalists may value a solid $15M revenue company at zero. Their model is not built on backing good businesses, but on funding 'upside options'—companies with the potential for explosive, outlier growth, even if they are currently unprofitable.
The persistent "never quit" advice is "venture capital bullshit." Since VCs can't recoup their investment, their only rational move is to encourage founders to keep trying against all odds. For founders, it's often better to quit, reset the cap table, and start fresh rather than waste years on a failing venture.
VCs are incentivized to deploy large amounts of capital. However, the best companies often have strong fundamentals, are capital-efficient, or even profitable, and thus don't need to raise money. This creates a challenging dynamic where the best investments, like Sequoia's investment in Zoom, are the hardest to get into.
Founders are warned that accepting investment, no matter the amount, creates an obligation to deliver a 5-10x return. This pressure can force compromises on mission-critical elements, such as switching from organic to conventional materials to improve margins.
In the creator economy, success isn't always defined by venture-backed growth. Many top creators intentionally cap their audience size and reject outside investment to maintain full control over their business and content, defining success as a sustainable, manageable enterprise rather than a unicorn.
