November 30, 2009

Don’t be amazed by the millions of $$$ of startup funding

Article about ▸

written by Marek Foss

Money

I hear more and more news about millions of $$$ and €€€ being pumped into startups I have never heard of. Each time I read such a piece I think “Oh boy, I could do so much with that money!”. But then the smart side of me kicks in and I realize I could barely live a year or two on that. Why? Because when you really think about it, the cost of running a startup with no profits is huge. Let’s count it.

Assume you have an idea for a startup. You can even assume you have a running demo you put up with your friend. Now, you want to go public, so you need money to keep going a year or two without decent profits. What your costs could be?

First of all, you need a Web Developer. If you are serious about the business, and want to develop fast, you probably need 2 or 3 of them. That’s $70K per year per developer, according to Salary.com. That’s $210K already. You could add a Project Manager to coordinate things and mark the direction of the development. That’s an easy $100K, $310K in total.

You definitely need an experienced System Administrator to keep your development environment usable, and your production server alive and snappy – nobody likes to visit a slow website, and a proper server configuration is a must. Hence we have another $70K. And if our service requires ad-hoc design, a Web Designer would set us $50K back.

Finally, we probably would need an Accountant, we don’t want to pay government fines, do we? Another $40K goes from our pocket. It also would be nice to give a salary to yourself and your friend, and since you started the business, $100K pre each seams reasonable. In total, that’s $670K in salaries alone.

If you add the maintenance costs for an office, servers, hosting, marketing and some unexpected events, you easily get a $1M a year. Taking into consideration that your team is actually just 9 people, including the Accountant, you can clearly see this is a really small business. Even $3M of funding would keep you up less than 3 years.

Now imagine you want the business to grow, hire new people etc. You will need analysts, marketing people, people who will manage the previous bunch etc. If you double the team after the first year, with the above funding you would be running low on cash by the end of the 2nd year. And how much funding would you need if you had significantly more employees?

According to CrunchBase, Twitter has 83 employees, and its last Series D funding was $100M. Before, they got $35M, $15M and $5M. Given their sophisticated real-time infrastructure, and bearing in mind that it looks like they spent all the previous funding, with the calculations we did here, it’s safe to say that the latest funding should keep them up a few years. But the numbers don’t look so amazing, do they?

I’m not an expert, but for a startup I’d suggest a couple of things. First of all, don’t hire like crazy – it’s not the size of the company that matters, but the market share and profits. Secondly, keep the infrastructure reasonable – it should work, not be another gadget for the house. Finally, think how you could minimize the cost of marketing, but not its effects – maybe go viral?

If you have your own experiences, share them in the comments. Thanks!

Headline photo by thinkpanama


If you liked the article, please spread the word and share it!

  • Share

Comments


ciukes writes:

You have no experience in a startup at all I think. Developing one is not like building a corporation. You don’t start with long list of people you want to hire and the spend all your budget for it, this is last thing to do. Most of the time startup is a hard and painful way of life with a weak promise of success with high failure chance. Funding helps you to grow your idea but comes with many constraints made by investors. It’s not a big bag of money you get for free.


Marek Foss writes:

“It’s not a big bag of money you get for free.”

Well yes, exactly my point. Don’t be amazed by the millions, it’s not going into your pocket. But the thing is, I’m talking about the costs of growing your business, not the moment where you create your idea. Thus I quite don’t get your idea. No sensible VC will invest to have a 2 persons team and a demo. They want you to expand it and implement before competition. I don’t think you will get away with not hiring anyone until Series B funding, don’t you think?


You should consider that while you have no profit, it doesn’t mean the company isn’t making any revenue.

Also, you’re including a few “useless” people in your list: Accounting can be outsourced to an accounting company which will make it much cheaper. Same can be said for system administration and possibly web design, depending on what you’re doing. Even a web-oriented service could have another company do graphical design but perhaps in a cooperative fashion if they need long-term partnership.


Marek Foss writes:

Yes, revenue may cover some costs, but it’s not like it will generate millions within months. Also, I realize you could cut down some costs by outsourcing the paper work and design, but you could (and probably should) utilize these savings on hiring more web devs.

Maybe I didn’t make myself clear, but what I mean is that the millions of funding cash isn’t really anything huge, because the costs of running a business are far greater then one can imagine without a deeper thought.


ciukes writes:

If you think 1m is not a big pile then please read about seed money and investors like Paul Graham’s Y-Combinator or the Seedcamp initiative. The latter makes startups to compete very hard to get as much as ... £50k The real prize is buzz created around you and your project and connections with mentors and other people you create during this process. This is a much higher value for a startup than stinky money:)
> No sensible VC will invest to have a 2 persons team and a demo.
This is handled by the seed investors. Approach early, and help to grow - that’s the idea.

> Maybe I didn’t make myself clear, but what I mean is that the millions of funding
> cash isn’t really anything huge, because the costs of running a business are far greater
> then one can imagine without a deeper thought.
You’re right and wrong at the same time. The thing here is the type of business you do. Youtube for example was and is burning money like hell. Surely 1m is nothing for them and luckily Google was crazy enough to buy the project before it run out of money. That’s one end of the scale. The other is smaller scale projects - this kind of money can be a big thing for them and these could live for a while off the 1m cheque.



Leave a comment: (comments may not appear immediately due to page caching)

Name: Email: (not disclosed)

WWW: Remember my details

Notify me of follow-up comments

Feed me:

(subscribe)
 to feed
  • Subscribe and get the new articles every now and then directly in your reader — I recommend using Google Reader

Connect:

 by Google
Google FriendConnect appears to be down at the moment. Sorry for inconvenience.
Related Posts with Thumbnails