Startups – what does it take to get funded?

Many different options in funding startups

Attended ‘KPMG’s Financing for Innovative Companies’ seminar this morning. Excellent panel of speakers. David Brabazon (CFO Azur Pharma) spoke from the real experience of building something with his two partners in five years. My real take there was their practical approach and their openness to different methods of financing business – through self investment, private equity, VC, wealthy individuals – whatever works in the context of requirements, vision and practical availability. Interesting model – generate commercial revenues before initiating R&D spend.

Niall Olden (Managing Partner Kernel Capital) spoke about many of the investments they have made in the last year in particular. Reminded us that the vast majorities of exits will be trade sales.

Anna Scally (partner KPMG) referenced the work of the Innovation Task force and empathised with some of the frustrations of the entrepreneur community in Ireland.

Barry Maloney (partner Balderton Capital) provided the international VC perspective. Reminded the audience of what they are seeking – and set the expectation for entrepreneurs of being in for a relatively long haul e.g. 7-8 years before any significant exit. Seeking those who want to be ‘rich, not famous’. More seriously, addressed (as did David Brabazon) the requirement for fit between the VC and the entrepreneur.

All in all excellent seminar hosted by KPMG – good contrast between perspective of the entrepreneur and the VCs (local and international).

…and no one pulled their punches – successful exits are the result of many things, but hard work (long hours, commitment to travel and drive) is the sine qua non.

[facebook_ilike]

Author: Barry OGorman

Barry O'Gorman is an independent business and IT consultant, based in Dublin, Ireland.

1 thought on “Startups – what does it take to get funded?”

  1. Barry what I’ve experienced of the financing of tech-based startups (from both vantage points) is client introspection and low-level deception versus investor’s lack of realism and subject-matter expertise. Where this happens progressive departures from plan to deep rough seem assured. Painful (and adversarial) experience seems to be the principal way of educating both entrepreneurs and investors on constructive engagement and the building of fast tech business.
    Considering the widespread availability of efficient tech research and business intelligence tools, coaching, subject-matter experts etc one would imagine there ought to be a better way.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*