[mgfist]

Not necessarily. You hear plenty of stories of companies who raised money they never ended up needing to touch.

What matters is why. Is it because growth is so bonkers that your burn stays minimal/zero despite increasing costs? Or is it because you don't spend anything and thus can get by with stable revenue. VCs are very happy with the first, less so with the second.

VCs would always prefer you get to megascale with less money - the less you raise, the less they get diluted.