A massive valuation for a "seed" round can be misleading. Often, insiders have participated in several unannounced, cheaper tranches. The headline number is just the final, most expensive tier, used to create FOMO and set a high watermark for new investors.

Mega-funds can justify paying "stupid prices" at the seed stage because they aren't underwriting a seed-stage return. Instead, they are buying an option on the next, much larger round where they'll deploy real capital. This allows them to outbid smaller funds who need to generate returns from the initial investment itself.

The current fundraising environment is the most binary in recent memory. Startups with the "right" narrative—AI-native, elite incubator pedigree, explosive growth—get funded easily. Companies with solid but non-hype metrics, like classic SaaS growers, are finding it nearly impossible to raise capital. The middle market has vanished.

Despite seeing 100x revenue multiples reminiscent of 2021, VCs are not accelerating their fund deployment or rushing back to fundraise. This more measured pace indicates a potential lesson learned from the last bubble, where rapid deployment led to poor vintage performance and pressure from LPs.

The most dangerous venture stage is the "breakout" middle ground ($500M-$2B valuations). This segment is flooded with capital, leading firms to write large checks into companies that may not have durable product-market fit. This creates a high risk of capital loss, as companies are capitalized as if they are already proven winners.

In the current market, companies prioritize liquidity and public market access over protecting previous private valuations. A lower IPO price is no longer seen as a failure but as a necessary market correction to move forward and ensure survival.

For startups experiencing hyper-growth, the optimal strategy is to raise capital aggressively and frequently—even multiple times a year—regardless of current cash reserves. This builds a war chest, solidifies a high valuation based on momentum, and effectively starves less explosive competitors of investor attention and capital.

The venture capital paradigm has inverted. Historically, private companies traded at an "illiquidity discount" to their public counterparts. Now, for elite companies, there is an "access premium" where investors pay more for private shares due to scarcity and hype. This makes staying private longer more attractive.

When evaluating follow-on opportunities, the conventional wisdom is to look for a Tier 1 VC leading the round. However, a specialized fund with deep industry expertise leading a Series A can be an equally powerful, or even stronger, positive signal for a company's potential and market fit.