[itsoktocry]

>Seattle program alumni like Remitly, Outreach and Zipline are regularly held up as evidence that Techstars can produce billion-dollar outcomes for both founders and investors, something that has happened less and less often in recent years.

Zipline looks cool, tough space to compete with Amazon though. The other two I've never heard of.

What makes these "billion dollar" successes? It looks to me like like Remitly is public, and down 60% since IPO. Who won here, besides insiders who cashed out? Certainly not current shareholders.

The tech world has a strange way of measuring success. The author is conscious of (and mentions) ZIRP implications, but doesn't tie it to the their own work. VCs trading insider shares at escalating valuations isn't real value.

Edit: I think my comment sounded harsher than I intended. These companies are successful, in that they exist and are delivering product to consumers. That's great. But "billion-dollar" outcome is a stretch in the face of ZIRP. How much value is there net of investment?

[bayindirh]

Zipline also delivers on-demand blood to hospitals in Africa over forests [0] in a consistent and time-constrained manner. I don't think Amazon can or want to compete with them on that space.

They are not in "here's your hamburger" business only.

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOWDNBu9DkU&

[CPLX]

Outreach is a legit and widely used sales SaaS company.

[jt2190]

> VCs trading insider shares at escalating valuations isn't real value.

To be fair, this is your thesis, and you are free build your portfolio around it.

VC’s portfolios are built around a different thesis, and a big part of that is preferred shares and valuations.

Note that both you and VCs can be “correct” (i.e. profitable) simultaneously, you’re just trading on different things.