[hcmag]

I've worked with these founders over at Google. They were normal, middle-of-the-road SWEs working on some (fairly boring) DoubleClick teams, one of which eventually shut down. In a matter of a year, with no revenue, code, product, or customers, I can't believe they've raised over $100m.

Are investors just betting on pedigree at this point? In which case, is a Princeton undergrad degree really worth that much?

Moreover, their stint in Google Search lasted maybe 2 months, but is still prominently displayed in their bios. Is that worth another few million?

I can't think of a better example of the SV echo chamber when an investment like this is announced. Even color.com and Juicero had more experienced founders/prototypes.

The future looks bleak when you see fashionable SV outfits leading the blind. It's no wonder why diverse founders with great ideas have trouble getting funded when so much money is going to companies like this.

[samfisher83]

They must be good at selling if they can convince people to get 100+ million with no "revenue, code, product, or customers." You can't hate on someone for making it.

[gitgud]

In other words, "you gotta respect the hustle"

[rajacombinator]

Without commenting on the validity of their business or the amount of money allocated, your premise is badly flawed. There’s no reason to think one’s SWE ranking at Google would correlate with success as an entrepreneur. (There’s fairly obvious arguments one could make for why they might be inversely correlated.) Furthermore a median engineer at Google is presumably at least a top decile engineer worldwide. Ultimately, life isn’t a report card, there’s lots of different paths to success.

[solean]

It's pretty elitist to think that you can never accomplish anything worthwhile just because you were only a low level employee at Google, which by the way, is a position most engineers dream of.

[simias]

It's not how I interpreted the parent, rather it's more that this type of investment is probably based a lot on previous experience, not future potential. As such I think it's relevant. Maybe they're geniuses but they haven't proved that yet.

[hcmag]

Sorry, I didnt mean to disparage the founders, although I see how I came off that way. The founders played the game well, and best of luck to them.

My comment was aimed at the investors who, with little compelling info, bandwagoned into pouring in millions. That, to me, is discouraging.

[aeries]

I can't speak for their coding abilities (which are a poor proxy for company founding abilities anyways), but Nader and Lawrence are both very sharp guys.

[hashsalt]

A16Z also funded 21.co's earlier iteration when they made terrible mining rigs. The cynic in me says they believe the instant liquidity + their brand name will paper over all cracks.

[nylonstrung]

I heard these guys are paying themselves a salary of $1M/yr each