I think the idea is that, since RH hasn't been acquired or gone public, they haven't yet "ended up" with a high valuation. It could all go away before the investors can get liquid (e.g., Theranos for a pathological example).
Just to clarify, we're debating whether Robinhood is a success and the measure of success being used is "can early investors cash out for a gain?"
What if every company checked that box and couldn't provide lasting value beyond that? Do we still consider this a success because we're posting on a forum run by a VC?
> What if every company checked that box and couldn't provide lasting value beyond that?
How long do you think that would be a sustainable situation? A high mid to late-private stage valuation is only supported by the promise of subsequent valuations.
If every company stopped achieving those subsequent valuations, it would feed back into the private valuations.
Ignoring any one specific company for a moment, an investor consistently able to invest early and time their exits near the peak of each company's valuation would be a roaring success.
That's my point. We're saying that Robinhood is a success as a company because an early investor would have had a nice exit? Thats our "success" barometer?