8 Comments
User's avatar
Peter Ashby Smith's avatar

The line about rounds being “permission slips” rather than trophies cuts through a lot of the startup theatre out there.

I’d add that the round often reveals the founder’s psychology as much as the company’s fundamentals. Some raise, like one I'm working with right now, to accelerate their signal. Others raise to outsource their conviction. Those are very different trajectories from there.

Petar Dimov's avatar

Thanks Peter. That is exactly the idea, and I agree the round often says as much about the founder as the business

Shweta Sharma's avatar

Yeahhh! This is disciplined framing of fundraising that cuts through a lot of industry noise.

The emphasis on rounds as checkpoints tied to risk reduction and proof, rather than vanity milestones, is exactly right and too often missed by early-stage founders. In practice, the most consequential shift you highlight is the transition from narrative-driven conviction (pre-seed/seed) to evidence-driven validation (Series A+). That inflection point is where many otherwise promising companies stall.

Petar Dimov's avatar

Glad it resonated. That shift from conviction to proof is where the story really changes

Andy Collen's avatar

As we grew into a truly independent world... its great to see this process spelled out. This is way better than watching Shark Tank to understand how this all works. THANKS!

Petar Dimov's avatar

Glad the explanation made the process clearer

Hina Gondal's avatar

Beautifully written

Petar Dimov's avatar

Thank you Hina