[logicallee]

it might be pretty easy to work out but that's not how valuations at a billion dollars work. Only actual transactions in shares would establish this kind of a valuation.

I mean just consider our specific example: at $10M profit, the price per earnings if you purport to be a billion dollar company, is 100. So, no alternative accounting metric would ever give you a billion-dollar valuation (assuming you bootstrapped, which implies high margins and low infrastructure and other costs, so really nothing would give you the billion-dollar valuation.)

I'm not an accountant, but from how I've experienced things, only if the company sells shares and establishes a valuation thereby can value the company at $1 billion in our example.

[joshjdr]

If the $60 million investment came in with a pre round valuation of less than $1b then the example given does not meet the requirement.

[logicallee]

Well, the thing is that $60 million is definitely not a "seed" amount of money - it's a ton of money.

In the context of the real world, your way is quite an odd way to interpret the "requirement" -- no money taken, ever, until the very first money that is sold for a percentage is raised at a valuation of $1 billion. Why? Why not let the first valuation be lower?

Under a more reasonable interpretation, i.e. totally bootstrapped, and eventually reaches $1 billion, the stated company meets the criteria. It's worth triple that now, and $60 million as a first raise eight years in is proof positive that it's a "totally bootstrapped business".

I can see where you're coming form, if the question is interepreted as "can I become a billionaire without selling any equity, by completely owning a billion-dollar totally bootstrapped business", but then it isn't nearly as interesting.