投资者群体动态

Paul Graham 2013-08-01

投资者群体动态

2013年8月

大多数投资者对你的看法中,最大的组成部分是其他投资者的看法。这当然是指数增长的配方。当一个投资者想要投资你时,这使得其他投资者想要投资,这又使得其他人想要投资,如此循环往复。

有时缺乏经验的创始人错误地得出结论,认为操纵这些力量是融资的本质。他们听到关于成功创业公司投资热潮的故事,并认为因此发生这种情况是成功创业公司的标志。但实际上,这两者并没有那么高度相关。许多引起热潮的创业公司最终失败了(在极端情况下,部分原因是热潮),而许多非常成功的创业公司在第一次筹集资金时只受到投资者的中等程度欢迎。

所以本文的目的不是解释如何创造热潮,而仅仅是解释产生热潮的力量。这些力量在融资中总是在某种程度上起作用,它们可能导致令人惊讶的情况。如果你理解它们,你至少可以避免感到惊讶。

当其他投资者喜欢你时,投资者更喜欢你的一个原因是你实际上成了一个更好的投资。筹集资金降低了失败的风险。确实,尽管投资者讨厌这一点,但你因此有理由为后来的投资者提高估值。在你没有钱时投资的投资者承担了更多风险,有权获得更高回报。此外,已经筹集资金的公司在字面上更有价值。在你筹集第一个一百万美元后,公司至少价值增加了一百万美元,因为它是和以前一样的公司,加上它在银行里有一百万美元。[1]

但要注意,因为后来的投资者如此讨厌价格被提高,他们甚至抵制这种不言自明的推理。只在你愿意失去的投资者身上提高价格,因为有些会愤怒地拒绝。[2]

当你在融资方面取得一些成功时,投资者更喜欢你的第二个原因是这使你更自信,而投资者对你的看法是他们对你公司看法的基础。创始人常常惊讶于投资者似乎多么快地知道他们开始成功筹集资金。虽然实际上有很多方法让这种信息在投资者之间传播,但主要载体可能是创始人自己。虽然他们对技术常常一无所知,但大多数投资者很擅长读人。当融资进展顺利时,投资者很快在你增加的自信中感觉到它。(这是普通创始人无法保持扑克脸的能力对你有利的一个情况。)

但坦率地说,当你开始筹集资金时,投资者更喜欢你的最重要原因是他们不擅长判断创业公司。判断创业公司即使对最好的投资者来说也很难。平庸的投资者还不如抛硬币。所以当平庸的投资者看到很多其他人想要投资你时,他们假设一定有原因。这导致了硅谷称为”热门交易”的现象,你有的投资者兴趣超出你所能处理的程度。

最好的投资者不太受其他投资者意见的影响。将自己的判断与其他人的平均在一起只会稀释自己的判断。但他们在实际意义上间接受到影响,即其他投资者的兴趣施加了截止日期。这是报价产生报价的第四种方式。如果你开始与一家公司接近达成报价,这有时会促使其他公司,甚至是好公司,做出决定,以免失去交易。

除非你是谈判奇才(如果你不确定,你就不是),在夸大这一点以推动好投资者决定时要非常小心。创始人一直尝试这种事情,投资者对此非常敏感。如果有的话,过于敏感。但只要你告诉真相,你就是安全的。如果你与投资者B进展得很远,但你宁愿从投资者A那里筹集资金,你可以告诉投资者A这正在发生。这没有操纵。你确实处于困境,因为你真的宁愿从A那里筹集资金,但当A的决定仍然不确定时,你不能安全地拒绝B的报价。

但是,不要告诉A B是谁。VC有时会问你在和哪些其他VC交谈,但你永远不应该告诉他们。天使投资人你有时可以告诉其他天使投资人,因为天使投资人彼此合作更多。但如果VC问,只是指出他们不希望你告诉其他公司你的谈话,你觉得有义务对任何你交谈的公司做同样的事情。如果他们推动你,指出你在融资方面缺乏经验——这总是可以安全打的牌——你觉得你必须格外谨慎。[3]

虽然很少有创业公司会经历兴趣热潮,但几乎所有的创业公司至少在最初都会经历这种现象的另一面,即群体在远处保持聚集。投资者如此受其他投资者意见影响的事实意味着你总是从某种困境开始。所以不要因为获得第一个承诺有多困难而气馁,因为大部分困难来自这种外部力量。第二个会更容易。

注释

[1] 会计师可能会说,筹集了一百万美元的公司如果是可转换债务就没有更富有,但在实践中,以可转换债务筹集的资金与股权轮筹集的资金几乎没有区别。

[2] 创始人常常对此感到惊讶,但投资者可能变得非常情绪化。或者更确切地说是愤慨;这是我观察到的主要情绪;但它非常普遍,有时会导致投资者违背自己的利益行事。我知道一个投资者以1500万美元估值上限投资了一家创业公司。早些时候他有机会以500万美元上限投资,但他拒绝了,因为一个较早投资的朋友能够以300万美元上限投资。

[3] 如果一个投资者强烈要求你告诉他你与其他投资者的谈话,这是你想要作为投资者的人吗?

感谢Paul Buchheit、Jessica Livingston、Geoff Ralston和Garry Tan阅读本文的草稿。

Investor Herd Dynamics

August 2013

The biggest component in most investors’ opinion of you is the opinion of other investors. Which is of course a recipe for exponential growth. When one investor wants to invest in you, that makes other investors want to, which makes others want to, and so on.

Sometimes inexperienced founders mistakenly conclude that manipulating these forces is the essence of fundraising. They hear stories about stampedes to invest in successful startups, and think it’s therefore the mark of a successful startup to have this happen. But actually the two are not that highly correlated. Lots of startups that cause stampedes end up flaming out (in extreme cases, partly as a result of the stampede), and lots of very successful startups were only moderately popular with investors the first time they raised money.

So the point of this essay is not to explain how to create a stampede, but merely to explain the forces that generate them. These forces are always at work to some degree in fundraising, and they can cause surprising situations. If you understand them, you can at least avoid being surprised.

One reason investors like you more when other investors like you is that you actually become a better investment. Raising money decreases the risk of failure. Indeed, although investors hate it, you are for this reason justified in raising your valuation for later investors. The investors who invested when you had no money were taking more risk, and are entitled to higher returns. Plus a company that has raised money is literally more valuable. After you raise the first million dollars, the company is at least a million dollars more valuable, because it’s the same company as before, plus it has a million dollars in the bank. [1]

Beware, though, because later investors so hate to have the price raised on them that they resist even this self-evident reasoning. Only raise the price on an investor you’re comfortable with losing, because some will angrily refuse. [2]

The second reason investors like you more when you’ve had some success at fundraising is that it makes you more confident, and an investors’ opinion of you is the foundation of their opinion of your company. Founders are often surprised how quickly investors seem to know when they start to succeed at raising money. And while there are in fact lots of ways for such information to spread among investors, the main vector is probably the founders themselves. Though they’re often clueless about technology, most investors are pretty good at reading people. When fundraising is going well, investors are quick to sense it in your increased confidence. (This is one case where the average founder’s inability to remain poker-faced works to your advantage.)

But frankly the most important reason investors like you more when you’ve started to raise money is that they’re bad at judging startups. Judging startups is hard even for the best investors. The mediocre ones might as well be flipping coins. So when mediocre investors see that lots of other people want to invest in you, they assume there must be a reason. This leads to the phenomenon known in the Valley as the “hot deal,” where you have more interest from investors than you can handle.

The best investors aren’t influenced much by the opinion of other investors. It would only dilute their own judgment to average it together with other people’s. But they are indirectly influenced in the practical sense that interest from other investors imposes a deadline. This is the fourth way in which offers beget offers. If you start to get far along the track toward an offer with one firm, it will sometimes provoke other firms, even good ones, to make up their minds, lest they lose the deal.

Unless you’re a wizard at negotiation (and if you’re not sure, you’re not) be very careful about exaggerating this to push a good investor to decide. Founders try this sort of thing all the time, and investors are very sensitive to it. If anything oversensitive. But you’re safe so long as you’re telling the truth. If you’re getting far along with investor B, but you’d rather raise money from investor A, you can tell investor A that this is happening. There’s no manipulation in that. You’re genuinely in a bind, because you really would rather raise money from A, but you can’t safely reject an offer from B when it’s still uncertain what A will decide.

Do not, however, tell A who B is. VCs will sometimes ask which other VCs you’re talking to, but you should never tell them. Angels you can sometimes tell about other angels, because angels cooperate more with one another. But if VCs ask, just point out that they wouldn’t want you telling other firms about your conversations, and you feel obliged to do the same for any firm you talk to. If they push you, point out that you’re inexperienced at fundraising—which is always a safe card to play—and you feel you have to be extra cautious. [3]

While few startups will experience a stampede of interest, almost all will at least initially experience the other side of this phenomenon, where the herd remains clumped together at a distance. The fact that investors are so much influenced by other investors’ opinions means you always start out in something of a hole. So don’t be demoralized by how hard it is to get the first commitment, because much of the difficulty comes from this external force. The second will be easier.

Notes

[1] An accountant might say that a company that has raised a million dollars is no richer if it’s convertible debt, but in practice money raised as convertible debt is little different from money raised in an equity round.

[2] Founders are often surprised by this, but investors can get very emotional. Or rather indignant; that’s the main emotion I’ve observed; but it is very common, to the point where it sometimes causes investors to act against their own interests. I know of one investor who invested in a startup at a 15millionvaluationcap.Earlierhedhadanopportunitytoinvestata15 million valuation cap. Earlier he'd had an opportunity to invest at a 5 million cap, but he refused because a friend who invested earlier had been able to invest at a $3 million cap.

[3] If an investor pushes you hard to tell them about your conversations with other investors, is this someone you want as an investor?

Thanks to Paul Buchheit, Jessica Livingston, Geoff Ralston, and Garry Tan for reading drafts of this.