$100M Was Once Big Money for a Startup. Now, It’s Common
I am surprised that the NYTimes doesn’t see it as a positive sign: the structures around start-up (accelerators, investors, hosting, third party tools, etc.) have grown in maturity and relevance quite considerably. I certainly expect people familiar with YCombinator to agree.<p>More funding like that means more companies trusted to spend that money into creating something profitable. If this goes into people who have grown companies into a unicorn a couple of times; scaling faster local operations lead by managers with relevant experience; AWS, GCP, Twilio &amp; Square bills, it’s certainly expensive but overall sensical.<p>I don’t know of an investor who, since 2000 has said: “This is silly, I can’t invest anymore.” and left, so I don’t think the game got non-sensical overall. Real-estate in SF certainly has, but high valuations proved when they made sense and gave investors confidence. There certainly has been cases where the value wasn’t justified, but very few at that level of money raised. Certainly less in proportion than the rounds with crazy valuations in 2000