No VC Venture

Focus on cash flow rather than profitability, bottom up prediction, first shipment, then test, forget the so-called "convincing" team, start from service, focus on function instead of form, fight selectively, hire as few employees as possible, use direct selling method, and use the leader of the industry to do the same. Facing the bleak truth, you are not a "convincing" team, no "superior" technology, not in a "promising market", which means that you are unlikely to get venture capital.

But it doesn't matter. Who didn't start from scratch?

Now let me tell you how to start from scratch.

Some people once told me that an entrepreneur's chance of getting venture capital is like being struck by lightning in a swimming pool on a sunny day.

But in my view, this analogy is too optimistic.

In this commercial society with hot money, good companies are never short of investment. Of course, the premise is that this is an excellent enterprise, at least it is a promising enterprise.

At the door of these enterprises, there are long queues of investors. The wealth of the capital has spoiled these enterprises. As long as they speak, the funds are huge.

Investors are in front of them, and investors are in front of them. They are arrogant. Needless to say, money is their uncle. They may refuse to invest in your business with all kinds of excuses: you are not a "convincing" team, no "superior" technology, not in a "promising market", or your company does not have the potential of venture capital at all. That is to say, it is impossible to buy on the market or be bought by a huge sum of money, or your organization is disturbed by too many government or environmental factors, and so on, so that people are depressed and discouraged, and the enterprises they are struggling to run seem to have failed. But for most start-ups, this is all.

If you can't get any venture capital, should you give up?

The answer is NO!

A firm and resolute answer, just as the investor refused you.

I can give you an example to illustrate that for many companies, too much money is worse than too little money - which does not mean that I do not want to run a business like NFL Super Bowl one day.

But until that day comes true, to succeed, we must be down-to-earth and start from scratch.

Next, I will tell you some art from scratch: focus on cash flow rather than profitability. Theoretically, profit is the key to survival.

The problem is that theory can not be used to pay bills.

In reality, you pay in cash, so please focus on cash flow.

If you want to start from scratch, your business should have these characteristics: less capital required, shorter sales cycle and payment period, and more revenue.

This means that you have to give up the list of 12 months to complete orders, deliveries and receivables.

Cash is everything for entrepreneurs.

From the bottom up prediction, many entrepreneurs make a top-down prediction: "there are 150 million cars in the United States.

Even in the first year, only 1% of the cars installed our satellite radio system, that is the 1 million 500 thousand system.

The bottom up prediction is this: "in the first year, we could create 10 installation points.

The average sales volume of each installation point is 10 sets per day, and the sales volume in the first year will be 24 thousand units.

The 24 thousand set is obviously far from the 1 million 500 thousand conservative estimates claimed in the top down.

Which one do you think is more likely to be realized?

I have already heard the critique of "how can you recommend sending goods that are not perfect"?

Wait, wait a minute.

"Perfection" is the enemy of "good enough".

When your product or service is good enough, submit them to customers as soon as possible so as to get cash inflow.

Besides, spending more time does not guarantee the perfection of products, but only produces more unnecessary functions.

After shipment, you can also see what problems the customer really needs to solve.

Of course, this requires a compromise between your reputation and cash flow: you certainly can't send a bunch of rubbish to your customers, but you can't wait for your product to be perfect.

Note: those companies related to life sciences should ignore this proposal.

Forget the so-called "convincing" team, the convincing team demands are too high -- especially the majority of people who define it as a group of people who work for super big companies in the past ten years.

These people are accustomed to a certain way of life, but they are by no means a self-made way of life.

Those who are young, cheap and eager to work are those who are quick but not necessarily full of experience.

When you achieve a substantial cash flow, hire those senior managers.

Before that, you'd better use those people who you can afford and cultivate them into excellent employees.

If you want to start a software company and let people spend money on your software, this is certainly a very clear business and a perfect business model.

However, before you complete your software, you can also provide consulting services based on your medium-term products.

There are two advantages to doing this: you can instantly earn income and let real customers test your product.

Once your software has withstood all kinds of tests and tests, you will be able to put...