[jacquesm]

I don't think the VCs are to blame at all. This is a one sided story but that side already gives off so many signals of not being cut out for the job that it isn't surprising to see them heaping the blame on another party. If you're the CEO and you are looking for capital you don't do that whilst giving the capital providers a mandate to run your company by proxy. That's on him. If VCs tell you to do 'X' and you don't agree you're well within your rights as CTO to tell them to shove it. (But more politely, of course.)

[speleding]

> I don't think the VCs are to blame at all

It's probably more reasonable to say "Not all the blame is on the VC". I've seen VCs, rich guys in their fifties with a lot of swagger, put unreasonable pressure on young padawan entrepreneurs to take more capital to grow faster than necessary. Then they over extended and it started failing apart. The entrepreneurs are ultimately responsible for taking the cash, but the power dynamic is such that the VCs surely deserve some blame for pressuring inexperienced entrepreneurs into biting off more than they could swallow.

[Dylan16807]

It seems fair to assign a lot of blame to the person that told you to do it and paid for you to do it as the owner of a good chunk of it.

You don't think that should have any blame at all?

[jacquesm]

The 'C' in CEO used to stand for something.

[Dylan16807]

It certainly isn't "takes all the blame no matter what happens".

Especially when they're up against the people that own the company!

[satvikpendem]

They don't own the company though. If you're raising 10 million on a 100 million dollar valuation, there's no way that VCs own the majority. There really is no reason to listen to anything they say.

[kasdi]

Clever Elephant Operator?

[kasdi]

ChatGPT: How can I tell my VC to shove it, but politely?