[jacquesm]

I can condense this to 'I thought CEO was a nice title but I failed at taking it seriously and allowed others to lead my company whilst I held the title'.

The results are predictable. Note how there is no acceptance of personal responsibility.

I also note that there isn't a shred of evidence for this whole story, and $100M to $0 does not seem like a believable trajectory (nor does $0 to $100M, but the other is much less believable).

[master_crab]

I’m willing to accept the 0 to 100M to 0 plot line. But I agree, if this was a truly productive post the poster would have also admitted some level of personal culpability. They are the founder after all and the VC is just another stakeholder. The founder hired those VPs, not the VCs.

A key requirement of any company is managing your equity holders.

[t0mas88]

$100M to 0 sounds plausible for a founder with common stock in a VC led company with little success. You can raise a lot of money without much revenue or track record, but it will come with all kinds of liquidation preferences leaving common stock at 0 if things don't go like a rocket ship.