
7 Rejections - flylib
https://medium.com/@bchesky/7-rejections-7d894cbaa084
======
bakztfuture
These kinds of things are very easy to call out in hindsight, so, I do
sympathize with the investors at least a bit.

Based on a collection of screenshots I put together of Airbnb's homepage over
time (using content from the Internet Archive) I wouldn't have invested either
in early versions of Airbnb:

[http://www.startuptimelines.org/startup-
timelines/airbnb/](http://www.startuptimelines.org/startup-timelines/airbnb/)

Fred Wilson got his email from PG, I believe, in January 2009 and if you look
at the Airbnb homepage then - the site is no where near as promising as it is
now.

~~~
morgante
I don't agree.

The fundamental business model of Airbnb didn't change through all those
homepage iterations—those were just redesigns of the exact same concept. In
fact, for the time I think Airbnb's original designs were quite current.

~~~
carrotleads
Yeah that is exactly what I thought as well..

its not like they pivoted... maybe the homepage pitch changes...

All this episode should highlight is that founders should not think that VC's
have some sort of wisdom when they reject...

They follow only one wisdom and that is traction... if you got that and in
huge spades, then everything can be explained in a wise manner.. and we will
marvel at their wisdom.

------
tptacek
How did they get such clear "No" answers?

That list of rejections was very, very unlike my experience trying to raise
VC, which was more like 7-10 VC firms giving meaningless "yes, soon!"
responses until we gave up.

~~~
paul
They said "no" because they didn't want to waste time meeting with such an
obviously unpromising startup :)

I was one of the angels who simply didn't respond, in part because I was busy
with my own startup, but also because the idea of a marketplace for renting
out air mattresses just didn't sound very appealing...

~~~
tptacek
Then let me reframe the question:

"How would I go about presenting my company in such a way that it'd seem so
unpromising that only smart investors would give me the time of day?"

It feels like maybe there's an "uncanny valley" between "no plausible way this
team is getting funded speculatively" and "no-brainer straight- to- partner-
meeting".

~~~
mbesto
I've pitched to 30+ investors and got rejected....a lot. Here's my generalized
conclusion: VC funding is like dating. Easy money goes for the hot sexy blonde
at the corner of the bar in the west village, but it doesn't mean the slightly
less attractive brunette sitting in the corner isn't the best catch. No one
would dare miss out hitting on the blonde, and no one is going to fault anyone
for not hitting on the brunette "she's uninteresting". My only advice is to
understand first what the investors' thesis is and play your pitch to those
strengths. For example - what markets, what they look for in teams, and what
their fund's goal is. I've had a fair share of VC's be brutally honest with me
on the last point with an answer of "we need just one billion dollar business
in order to return our fund, so we take as many bets as we can to ensure we
get one".

~~~
learnstats2
You could easily have made this point without degrading women.

~~~
IanDrake
Well, you got that completely wrong. What would have been correct is:

"You could easily have made this point without degrading men."

In his story he generalizes men as playing the fool and makes no
generalization about women.

~~~
IanDrake
Yikes! To correct my straight bias:

There was no generalization made at all. He never made reference to gender of
the person walking into the bar. It could have been a woman walking into a gay
bar.

My apologies.

~~~
learnstats2
If you wanted to tie yourself in knots, you are succeeding.

The degradation that I saw was that, in the analogy, women are sexually
objectified. Women appear in the story exclusively in a sexual context, where
there is no good reason for that. The context makes it clear that this is
normal and expected within the (male) OP's world.

"No one would dare miss out hitting on the blonde". There is a clear
generalization here, that everyone should find blonde women most attractive,
or at least be socially required to act as though they do. Perhaps women are
also expected to find the blonde woman most attractive, or perhaps women's
opinions aren't really worth considering.

You might re-examine your own gender and sexuality biases in this context.

~~~
IanDrake
>If you wanted to tie yourself in knots, you are succeeding.

I'm actually being sardonic. The political correctness police are a bit
tiresome. My point is that, if one wishes, they can analyze any statement to
be as sexist, racist, homophobic, etc... Including yours.

>The degradation that I saw was that, in the analogy, women are sexually
objectified

If women are 'sexually objectified' by other women is it a problem?

Why did you overlook the completely racist message in his analogy? Assuming
most men prefer blonds assumes white culture, which is racist since I doubt
black and asian men feel the same. I don't know, maybe I'm racist for doubting
that assumption?

Also if a character's gender isn't identified in a story, is it sexist to
assume that character's gender is the same as the storyteller? I was guilty of
that one too.

This where the P.C. police trip over their own logic and fall into the pile of
B.S. they've created.

------
simonebrunozzi
For Brian:

On Dec 13th, 2012, I wrote the following email to you, after having applied
for a “Head of Community” position at AirBnB. I didn’t get any reply either.
Note that I cannot claim I became the big success that AirBnB has after these
“rejections”, but it still surprises me that you or your org didn’t even
wanted to talk to a Technology Evangelist from AWS. I guess you did a similar
type of mistake with me.

"Hi Brian, I know you’re busy, therefore I’ll keep it short.

My name is Simone, I work in San Francisco for Amazon Web Services, and I’m
interested in becoming the Global Head of Community at Airbnb.

I think I have what it takes to be successful in that role, and I’m a big fan
of Airbnb.

Let me know if we can discuss, or if you want more details.

Have a great day,"

~~~
simonebrunozzi
I'm wondering why the downvotes - can someone care to explain? I'm honestly
curious on why.

~~~
petercooper
Just my guess.

You were sorta putting your situation on a par with investors missing out on
investing in the early stages of a company now worth $24bn. That is to say,
them not paying attention to you is equivalent to missing out on an absolutely
mind boggling amazing opportunity (in hindsight).

Now, you might truly be as awesome as that but people tend to vote down
comments where people are blowing their own trumpets, for better or worse.

~~~
simonebrunozzi
And what about this sentence then? "Note that I cannot claim I became the big
success that AirBnB has after these “rejections”"

~~~
MichaelGG
Why do you think they owe you a response? Your comment sorta sounds like you
think you're something special, maybe that's why people downvoted?

~~~
simonebrunozzi
Thanks. I think what you say makes sense, as far as how my comment might be
perceived.

------
rodrigocoelho
Reminds me of BVP's anti-portfolio:
[http://www.bvp.com/portfolio/antiportfolio](http://www.bvp.com/portfolio/antiportfolio)

------
arikrak
> Next time you have an idea and it gets rejected, I want you to think of this
> email.

The winner of a lottery could go around telling people not give up buying
lottery tickets...

~~~
bazillion
I don't think that's quite applicable in this case, as getting a business
funded is a far cry from winning the lottery -- plenty of people frequenting
this site were able to obtain funding under similar circumstances (a lot of
rejections amidst a couple yes's).

The reason this is the exact opposite of winning the lottery, is that the
lottery is the equivalent of saying, "Please, a higher power, change my life
by granting me all that I want.", whereas someone getting their company funded
is more akin to saying, "I want to take full responsibility for the failures
_and successes_ of my own life, and to even become responsible for the
livelihood of others.".

In short, they are worlds apart as far as mentality goes. Regardless of the
success of the company after the funding, going forward with a company in the
face of such utter rejection by those who the author viewed as "smart people"
takes a mentality that is shared by pretty much all of those who have achieved
similar success.

~~~
curiousjorge
Or maybe the "smart people" are exactly that and that's as far as they will go
as we've seen throughout history when smart people get together decisions
become more about maintaining ones ego rather than actual results. Taleb terms
so called smart people as "empty suits". 50 cent is a successful venture
capitalist, but do people picture him first when they think smart people?

------
hauget
Reminds me of Stephen King's rejection slips: "By the time I was fourteen the
nail in my wall would no longer support the weight of the rejection slips
impaled upon it. I replaced the nail with a spike and went on writing.”

Like Guy Kawasaki once said, "Don´t Let The Bozos Grind You Down".

~~~
lukaslalinsky
With Stephen King (or any book author) it's a little different. It's not like
they get rejected and keep selling that one book they just wrote. Most authors
write bad books when they are starting, they get rejected and they continue to
write more books, usually better books.

~~~
hauget
"It's not like they get rejected and keep selling that one book they just
wrote." (1) just because you're selling doesn't mean you're making profit. (2)
Airbnb wasn't profitable when they were getting rejected, so in a sense "they
kept writing". Hell, they even sold cereal boxes to stay afloat before
Ycombinator picked them up!
[https://www.airbnb.com/obamaos](https://www.airbnb.com/obamaos)

------
caltonji
Marc Andreessen talked about passing on AirBnb's initial investment round at
How to Start a Startup. It helps put these rejections in perspective:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFX95HahaUs&t=29m11s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFX95HahaUs&t=29m11s)

------
tomasien
These rejections are a testament to why you shouldn't give up just because
smart people give you a hard "no", but also why storytelling is so important.
These investors clearly did not understand Airbnb, and I think the Airbnb guys
would admit that's in large part because they did a bad job explaining it.

Explaining why something that is small today could some day be huge is so
hard.

~~~
silverlake
To be fair, their original idea was to rent out a couch for people to crash
on, much like couchsurfing. I don't know if even Chesky imagined it would grow
to it's current state. Uber was similarly silly when it started: expensive
limos on-demand for rich guys in SF. Investing at this stage is just like
signing a new band, it's just a lottery ticket.

~~~
tomasien
Totally - see my comment at the bottom of this thread.

------
GuiA
Much like tech hiring, investors prefer to optimize for false negative over
false positives. Especially because the power dynamic is still skewed in their
way, which allows them to say things like "call us back when you get to a
series A" \- none of the risk, all of the upside. Kind of like that girl who
rejected me in high school but said "if in 10 years we both haven't found
someone, maybe we can get together".

~~~
curiousjorge
Yeah that one really irked me. Hey, call us when you are a billionaire and
we'll talk about investing. Yeah I'll marry you when it's in the prenup.

I'd immediately pull out my funds as an investor out if I found out the names
of the people writing these rejection letters. It would also be bad for street
cred. "hey these guys missed out on the deal of the century, who else did they
reject?"

150k is like peanuts to these firms with millions of dollars to throw. Hell,
I'd bought out of the money put options near expiry if it meant there was a
slight chance it would have potentially unlimited returns.

~~~
frostmatthew
> hey these guys missed out on the deal of the century

When you figure out how to determine that _before_ the fact I'm sure there are
plenty of VC firms who would love to hire you.

> who else did they reject?

They rejected countless startups that have since failed (and surely some other
that have succeeded). VCs are human, you can't expect them to have the
clairvoyance required to only invest in eventually successful companies and
only turn down eventual failures.

~~~
curiousjorge
>When you figure out how to determine that before the fact I'm sure there are
plenty of VC firms who would love to hire you.

My email is in my profile (if anyone wants to hire me). I've described a
strategy that involves making small bets across large number of startups and
not focusing on making judgements or even attempting to figure out how much
this startup is going to be worth (as you say VC are human, why introduce that
inherent bias to a numbers game?) because like we witnessed with the guys who
rejected Airbnb, their own bias towards safety incurred a huge opportunity
cost.

> They rejected countless startups that have since failed (and surely some
> other that have succeeded). VCs are human, you can't expect them to have the
> clairvoyance required to only invest in eventually successful companies and
> only turn down eventual failures.

Exactly, which is why I feel like they should ignore their own instincts and
thought processes. Even if they were able to land a few successful ones, how
can we be certain that it was not the work of dice rolling? Studies show that
most money managers perform no better than buying the index or throwing darts,
what makes you think VC's suddenly have improved odds?

~~~
umanwizard
Wait -- so you'll invest in a startup blind, regardless of fundamentals,
without trying to ballpark its valuation?

Give me an hour to come up with a business plan, and I'll shoot you an e-mail
:P

~~~
curiousjorge
If that's what you got then no, I think you should check with your local
donation institutions because I'm not running a charity. Another red flag
actually, because I checked my email and I didn't find a business plan in my
inbox and 2 hours has passed. If you were serious I would've read it and
rejected you because the first thing I would do is not read the business plan
but talk about your experience and see if you have a history of being non
punctual or any thing that would suggest dishonesty.

------
mangeletti
The only thing to be warned about here is the blowback effect. This is a form
of confirmation bias, whereby the victim uses rejection as a means of
confirmation.

~~~
bazillion
I was curious to what he meant by the blowback effect, and so my googling
eventually led me to The Backfire Effect[1] which is when "in the face of
contradictory evidence, established beliefs do not change but actually get
stronger".

I don't really see that applying in the sense of obtaining venture capital, as
it is well known that you aren't going to immediately walk in to an office and
hand them a check for the valuation you asked for. It's going to take a bunch
of both hard and soft rejections, but a person isn't usually going to be in
that room pitching to these VCs if they don't already strongly believe that
their startup is fundable.

[1]
[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Backfire_effect](http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Backfire_effect)

~~~
mangeletti
Ah yes, I meant "backfire effect".

This pertains to the conclusion (and thus the premise) of the blog post:

"Next time you have an idea and it gets rejected, I want you to think of these
emails."

The message in my comment is, don't allow yourself to fall pray to the
backfire effect when people reject your ideas (whether VC, colleagues, etc.).
If people reject your idea, it might mean it's not a very valuable idea, as
opposed to being an indication that you're on to something that's so radically
new and different, etc.

------
caseyf7
"It's not in one of our prime 5 markets...you would be better without us...but
Hey call us when you're doing your series A".

This ranks just below my favorite answer:

"We love that you have 1M users, but we need to see 10M before an A round.
(Month passes). Oh, really 10M users that's great but we like to see 50m
before doing A rounds now. Come back later!"

Of course, you won't need this chump change fund's money when you reach that
point.

------
amelius
Airbnb is an example of a company that is nothing more than just a brand,
because anybody can build a booking website in a matter of a few weeks.

So, this is just gambling. I'm not sure of what interest that would be here,
but that is of course a personal opinion.

~~~
prostoalex
> Airbnb is an example of a company that is nothing more than just a brand,
> because anybody can build a booking website in a matter of a few weeks.

Many people have, and some (Roomorama, FlipKey) are reasonably successful.
Heck, there's entire sub-sector of vacation home rentals (HomeAway,
VayCayHero) that has publicly traded companies operating in it.

The problem with two-side marketplace is the trust. Bait-and-switch and
similar scams have plagued marketplaces like CraigsList. You arrive at a
place, and it's not what the photos look like. You make a reservation, and are
told at the last minute that it got "flooded" a night before, and now the host
gives you an option to switch to an inferior place or pay up more for a
better-looking option. You arrive and find out the place is not for rent, and
the photos have been taken by some scammer who thrives on taking small
deposits and just repurposes same photos across multiple sites. Then it
degrades into horrors like this one
[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1205794/Rape-
horror-...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1205794/Rape-horror-
tourist-used-couchsurfing-website-aimed-travellers.html)

Building a trust network and keeping a reasonably clean two-side marketplace
is very hard, and is a major asset.

------
mikeryan
An oldie from Fred Wilson where he calls himself out for missing on Airbnb.

[http://avc.com/2011/03/airbnb/](http://avc.com/2011/03/airbnb/)

------
Kiro
> We were attempting to raise $150,000 at a $1.5M valuation. That means for
> $150,000 you could have bought 10% of Airbnb.

This is completely off-topic but since the $150,000 is going back to the
business, wouldn't that mean that the valuation becomes $1.65M? The word
"bought" makes it sound like someone is taking the money and selling their
share.

~~~
rory096
This is the distinction between 'pre-money valuation' and 'post-money.'

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-
money_valuation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-money_valuation)

~~~
mostlystatic
So this means 1.5M was the post-money valuation, correct?

~~~
rory096
You know, I originally had a hard answer and edited it away because I think OP
is ambiguous.

>for $150,000 you could have bought 10% of Airbnb.

Does that mean for $150K I can buy as many shares as constitute 10% of the
current outstanding number? Or that after I pay $150K, I will own 10%?

Since new shares are issued, in the former case I end up with 9.0909...%
(1/11th) of the company. That gives us a post-money valuation of... $1.65M!
(and $1.5M pre-money) But in the more probable reading of the phrase, I own
10% of the post-money $1.5M company, giving us $1.35M pre-money.

So, your choice. Someone more in the VC loop might be able to say that the
phrasing definitely means one or the other; I've just got the math.

------
zekevermillion
It looked like an awesome team, but investors didn't see the opportunity. I
read that one fund (I think USV) took the miss as a lesson not to base
investment decisions on whether their partners would use a particular service.
The consuming proclivities of 50-year-old millionaires not being indicative of
a larger market. Seems terribly sloppy as an investor (or prospective
employee, for that matter) to be influenced by such a personal bias. But maybe
the founders didn't fully expect such an amazing success, either?

~~~
hodwik
In general you have to use your own life experiences to make investments.

It's nice to think that you could put yourself in someone else's shoes well
enough to make stock purchases based on what you think they will want, but
investors learn very quickly that that doesn't actually work. "Buy what you
know."

It means there are great opportunities for people who are a minority in the
investment world -- like ladies.

Look at ETSY stock right now. It's insanely cheap I believe (at 1.771B
valuation). Despite being cultishly popular with 20-something women, who will
soon be entering the demographic that spends the most, it's been crashing
through the floor. A male-led investment world is not putting their money
there. Ask any young lady what they think of Etsy and you'll see why that's
dumb.

In 2008, when Starbucks was priced at $3.42 a share, asking any woman what
business they think will grow in popularity would have elicited the reply of
"Starbucks, duh", but investors didn't see the opportunity. In 2009, Lululemon
was priced at $2.25 a share.

It's a good thing for minority investors. They just need to get in the buying
market, and take some risks.

~~~
zekevermillion
Buy what you know is certainly a good heuristic. If I were a partner at a fund
that invests in Internet-enabled networks of engaged users, I would be very
alarmed if companies like AirBnB and Etsy started to drift outside the scope
of "what I know". Also, what I know probably shouldn't be so limiting as _what
I use_. For example, one of Warren Buffet's best investments was Blue Chip
Stamp -- a discount coupon book publisher. I doubt Warren Buffet ever licked a
discount stamp (other than as a stunt). But he does understand businesses that
generate float. He is the master of investing float.

------
sagivo
Yes, follow your dream. but don't follow too hard that you loose all your
money and savings because "the airbnb guys got rejected too". sometimes it's
good to be realistic and understand that if you get rejected all the times
maybe it means you're in the wrong direction. posts like that will encourage
people to keep hoping and might causing them damage by not being connected to
reality.

------
datashovel
I remember watching an investigative journalism piece that showed that
professional traders on Wall Street can barely outperform a monkey.

I think given these kinds of statistics I can't understand why there's not
some public fund where average citizens can invest toward. That fund would run
a lottery every year and accept 'x' # of companies depending on how much was
invested the previous year. Each of those companies would (depending on
current cash flow) provide a % of ownership to the fund.

Noone tells them how to use the money. No investor has authority to interfere
whatsoever.

Of course I imagine there would be reporting requirements, and require certain
levels of transparency into their books and such in order to create at least
some hurdles to prevent people who are just out to scam the system from
applying.

Maintaining the status quo just perpetuates the "rich get richer" paradigm.

------
sungmoon
Investors who missed out on great products aren’t to be sneered at. Indeed,
Airbnb of year 2008 would’ve looked like merely a toy to most people —
something that in no way could become huge. There were too many risks. Even if
it grew, it still seemed would not be anything to write home about. That's why
people who invest in toy-like products are usually family or friends of the
founders. I wrote a blog post about this.

[https://medium.com/@sungmoon/the-next-big-
thing-53ae218c4b6d](https://medium.com/@sungmoon/the-next-big-
thing-53ae218c4b6d)

------
ionwake
If I was at the same stage as they were at this time. How would I have
contacted these investors - or similar ones?

I have no idea how to start the process of asking VCs for a small sum in
return for a share of the company.

I would really appreciate and answer.

Thank you.

~~~
kevinmobrien
The "traditional" answer is to identify the VCs you're interested in, and
network your way into an introduction if you don't know them yourself.
Accelerator programs can also be a way to become involved.

Have a clear, clean pitch deck. Know your unique value proposition, understand
your competition, be able to demonstrate that there's a market and that it's
significant. Show traction, team, and ability to execute.

------
RawInfoSec
Every investment opportunity has risk, and many possible outcomes. There will
always be investors who gained. There will always be investors who missed a
chance to gain. Alternatively, there could be investors who lost, or those who
dodged the bullet.

This one had gains and missed opportunity. No one lost anything except time
reading a post that appears to be 'prodding the losers' when there weren't
any. In fact, some of the investors probably made more elsewhere in something
closer to their realm, so it can't readily be said that an opportunity was
missed.

------
kriro
It's obviously easy to critique in hindsight but I think it's interesting that
a theme of the rejections is "not our type of marked". It seems like the
investors are somewhat conservative in sticking to what they know which is a
little disappointing (I like the response that the investors can't really help
because they don't know much about the market). That suggests that you'll get
filtered out pretty quickly on variables like market type which seems pretty
unfortunate.

~~~
peeters
Keep in mind that this can also be code for "we didn't get a good vibe from
you, but since it's hard to explain intangibles, we'll say it's not our type
of market." Investors also aren't necessarily above hand waving to spare
feelings.

------
shinamee
It's really hard to tell the success of an idea and I think one investor
mentioned in the email that they don't understand the market so it would make
it hard to nurture such products.

They simply cannot invest in all ideas, just because Brian got lucky doesn't
makes it applies to all startups

------
bambax
> _The other 2 did not reply._

OT, but I applied to be a contract photographer for AirBnB a month ago and did
not get a response either -- not "no", not "maybe later", not anything.

I did get an automated email thanking me "for pressing send"; after that,
zilch.

So I guess it goes both ways.

~~~
petercooper
That's ultimately the lesson IMHO. You gotta keep hustling and doing what you
think is right but not get hung up about any particular connection or rung of
the ladder.

------
larrys
This, in itself, means nothing. If you need to read things like this in order
to understand that not everybody is going to love you or your idea and to help
deal with rejection, most likely you are not be cut out to be an entrepreneur.
Every investor has stories of ideas that they passed on that they shouldn't
have (in retrospect of course) and every entrepreneur (or guy dating in high
school) also knows of investors or dates that they felt made the wrong
decision.

Pushes all the right buttons, but keep in mind that those investors also
rejected vastly more ideas that most likely never went anywhere. That was
their take on airbnb at the time.

With respects to Airbnb, Fred Wilson of USV passed on the opportunity as well
and posted emails showing where Paul Graham personally spent quite a bit of
time trying to convince him otherwise.

[1]
[http://www.paulgraham.com/airbnb.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/airbnb.html)

------
mud_dauber
Good lord, I needed to see this.

------
hyuuu
I am surprised that they only got 7 rejections, I would expect a lot, lot more
NOs

~~~
detaro
7 rejections after a meeting with 7 potential investors, not 7 rejections
overall

------
sospep
is this post the airBnb version of the godadday commercial? \-
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIBfctISM9M](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIBfctISM9M)

------
smil
This is evidence that:

Investors and VCs are not smart/do not have enough information/experience to
make smart decisions generally

The only way to escape working for non-smart people (bosses, VCs) is to
bootstrap

------
trymas
Sorry, but this looks like humble-brag, because everybody knows what happened
in retrospect. Those VCs, probably can give CEO of ABB dozens of examples, how
they rejected some 'promising' startups which have failed, and a few which
they accepted and made them nice cash.

Also to this day ABB to me looks like Couch-surfing for money, unless you get
full apartment. And usually only advantage you get versus hotel is that you
have a kitchen and/or washing machine. IMHO, there are lucky people who own
apartments near city center, and are collect month's worth of rent from 4-7
night stays. That's how ABB looks to me after I tried it.

------
ageofwant
Survival bias, much ?

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias)

------
thomasrossi
refusal happens in life, nothing new? But at least most of that email had a
clear reason why, some also gave advice. I think they were lucky to have such
responses.

------
patmcguire
Made me really, really want to see the yes email.

------
cabinpark
Now show me the e-mails from investors of the hundreds of start-ups that get
rejected and fail.

------
pbreit
Even in 2008, was this a reasonable way to try and raise $150k? I would think
that level of investment should/would be procured from friends & family, not
cold-ish intros to angels/VCs?

------
localhost3000
Saw some VC tweeting this link with the caption, "VC is hard." ...I think he
missed the point of the article.

~~~
wutbrodo
His point is entirely consistent with Brian's point. Brian's saying
"consistent rejection doesn't mean you should give up" and the VC is saying
"even consistent VC rejections can be wrong because VC is hard".

------
gargarplex
This was when Airbnb was pre-YC

------
robg
Wish he showed the names.

------
e0m
7 is out of what? How many VCs gave them offers for money, and how many did
they take?

~~~
vlasev
It says right in the very first line of the article:

> On June 26, 2008, our friend Michael Seibel introduced us to 7 prominent
> investors in Silicon Valley.

Therefore, the answer to your question is: in this particular encounter they
talked to 7 VCs, got 5 NOs and 2 no-answer's.

------
curiousjorge
> for $150,000 you could have bought 10% of Airbnb.

Ouch. Ego can get very expensive. Consider this, had they invested, Airbnb
might not be where it is today.

------
anon3_
Ha. You know the same concept applies to talking to girls?

I'll never forget the day I went out exclusively to meet a girl. I was
rejected by maybe a hundred girls I approached. The worst one's were the ones
that just stared at their phone, like I wasn't even human.

I was tired. It was 8PM... around that. I go up and approach girl inside of a
clothing store. Please God speak english. She opens up with perfect english,
smiling. We went on a date right there. Huge confidence booster.

Frankly, people are a complicated bunch. You don't understand their learned
behaviors, position and internal politics. There's no way you could understand
the whether a girl is grumpy, just broke up, open to meeting someone new until
you come up to her.

We need more posts like this. Not just for VC's, I'd like to see comeback
stories for freelancers scoring gigs / job interviews.

Good job OP

