←back to thread

Tailscale has raised $160M

(tailscale.com)
655 points louis-paul | 3 comments | 08 Apr 25 10:36 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
tmpz22 ◴[08 Apr 25 17:51 UTC] No.43624557[source]▶
If they had taken just say $40 million would they be able to sustain their project for the foreseeable future and perhaps not yield as much future product direction and equity?

I honestly don't know how this big dealmaking works but it strikes me that when you take out this big of an obligation that the obligation has a gravity that may drag you in a direction you (or consumers) do not want to go.

Love Tailscale as a product (as does everyone I talk to) but genuinely want to learn more about the trade-offs as usually when we see big dollar signs all we do is celebrate.

replies(6): >>43624690 #>>43625018 #>>43625510 #>>43626138 #>>43626140 #>>43626489 #
vvpan ◴[08 Apr 25 18:30 UTC] No.43625018[source]▶
One of the main problems with raising too much is that you stop caring about product-market fit and can go on tangents that do not make you competitive. This is quiet common afaik.
replies(2): >>43625224 #>>43625814 #
1. duped ◴[08 Apr 25 19:55 UTC] No.43625814[source]▶
That's much less of a problem than not being able to raise enough in the next round because you only 1.5x'd instead of 3 or 5.
replies(1): >>43626102 #
2. pc86 ◴[08 Apr 25 20:25 UTC] No.43626102[source]▶
Isn't it better to 1.5x in 6 months on 40 million than 3x in 2 years on 160?

By definition focusing on things that don't grow your business because you have way too much money in the bank is going to be worse for your business than being forced to focus because you've only got a year of runway.

replies(1): >>43626218 #
3. ◴[08 Apr 25 20:39 UTC] No.43626218[source]▶