
SeedRamp - endtwist
http://www.seedramp.com/
======
gerasini
The have a bad attitude: "For the next 15 minutes, we will try to explain why
you and/or your ideas suck" ([http://goo.gl/NNKtIK](http://goo.gl/NNKtIK))

And want to invest with a $1M valuation
([http://goo.gl/2686da](http://goo.gl/2686da)).

To my mind, not so interesting. Sounds more like shark loans

~~~
notahacker
In fairness, the next sentence is "If we fail, you get a check.", so I'm
taking that more as an attempt at dry humour. Watching a random sampling of
videos, the feedback is pretty thoughtful and polite. Of course the valuations
aren't going to be the highest bearing in mind the tiny amount invested and
absence of due diligence.

~~~
davemel37
I agree. this is just a poor attempt at dry humor. That being said, If you
read his manifesto, he sounds very angry about the need for connections to get
investors and his anger comes off as crude and disrespectful in general. Maybe
it's just me, but he can do without all the contempt and anger and net the
same or a better result.

~~~
beachstartup
why not? it's a mildly refreshing change of pace from the smarmy bullshit and
platitudes most people put out.

------
manishsharan
20k ? Can you not just generate that much by consulting on the side? Thats
what I am doing. But then I have no choice as I am old , unattractive and have
an accent.

~~~
cellis
In a month?

~~~
lettergram
I once did a code review for $3,500 and it took about 8-12 hours. After I was
done, they asked me to fix the few bugs I found. I told them I was super busy
(which I was) and they offered me $10,000 to do the work ASAP. Since it would
only take me 8 or so hours to fix the bugs I could hardly pass it up. For two
days of work I walked away with $13,500 dollars, of course there is also tax
on that, so I netted like $9,000.

Depending how hard I/you try to find consulting work, you can totally make
20k, of course it depends on the month. The best part, is that you can write
off business expenses on your taxes. So, you pay significantly less (if any)
tax on that 20k.

~~~
brianwawok
Okay how many of those can you find in a year though?

I found $20 on the ground once. Doesn't mean I can just go outside and start
bending over till I get to 20k.

~~~
lettergram
I mean, it depends.

If you join a bunch of the freelance marketplaces it's really not hard. I
literally receive offers for jobs every day or so, most aren't that good, but
probably once every month or two it is as described.

The problem is, I have no idea going in if a code review is going to be easy,
or if the bugs are easy to fix. That's somewhat just luck.

~~~
true_religion
What freelance marketplaces do you use? I'm always looking for people who are
consistently good, but I'm wary of Elance/Upwork.

~~~
kofejnik
what kind of skills are you looking for? I believe I am (we are) good at a few
things

~~~
true_religion
Hi, do you have a company URL?

------
sharkweek
I'm not really sure how I feel about SeedRamp but I love the published
interviews. It's interesting to watch different personality types and how they
all answer questions/explain their businesses.

Are there many resources like this anywhere else out there?

~~~
jonlucc
The only one I know of (but I'm a biologist...) was This Week in Startups, the
podcast by Jason Calacanis. He had a segment in which he would critique
pitches. Not sure if the podcast or segment exist anymore.

------
staunch
If it was $50k or $100k, they might onto something. There's just not much any
team can do on $20k, especially in Silicon Valley.

So far, they've rejected every single startup except one, which they gave just
$5k to.

[http://www.seedramp.com/history.html](http://www.seedramp.com/history.html)

~~~
olalonde
If that's true, sounds like a great idea to gather startup ideas and business
plans.

------
davemel37
I can't speak to this idea, but these videos are PAINFUL to watch. In an age
where we are inundated with mediocre content I would much rather watch
interviews of carefully curated applicants and VCs than some random guy trying
to get money to put his dad's piano music on an app (this is really in one of
the videos).

The idea on paper sounds like a clever way to piggy back for a relatively low
risk level on a lot of startups...and as much as contrarian thinking is
pontificated, you have to wonder if there is a reason things are done the way
they are in the first place.

I am not saying you can't disrupt an industry, but you have to first
understand why the industry does it the way they do in the first place. It's
not like a bunch of dumb people got together and said lets do this thing as
backwards as possible. I have never met an idea for disruption that didn't at
some point come to realize that there are often forces beyond control at play
and it is very rare to be able to actually disrupt an industry just because
intellectually it seems backwards.

I think it's time to dial back the disruption rhetoric and focus on the value
creation as defined by people willing to pay more than it costs to make, sign,
seal, and delivered.

~~~
jakejake
I found the videos really interesting to watch because we see lots of polished
pitches here on HN, but here we're seeing everything. These are mostly just
going to a VC with a hand out - asking for money. But, that's what pitching a
company is. I think a lot of people who haven't done it imagine a slick deck
presentation in a boardroom. The reality is that you have to be able to sit
down in a coffee shop and sell your idea to someone who has more money than
you.

As far as the terms - I didn't look it over closely to see if it's a fair or
predatory deal. Anybody know if it's a fair deal?

~~~
davemel37
His terms are at your own discretion, but he assumes a few % points. (i.e you
decide what to offer.)

I guess I am not everyone, so some people can find value where I might not.
So, take everything I say with a grain of salt.

You have a point, but I've seen many non-polished, no pitch deck pitches that
as rough as they were you walked away with a sense that they are on to
something. They have some epiphany or insight and are attempting to turn it
into something real. These videos (i didn't watch all) come off as people that
have no idea what they are doing or even thinking other than, "I am going to
make an app and be a founder."

The problem this guy has is that most serious entrepreneuers won't partake in
his process, and this leaves over the large portion of people who don't have
access to capital for a very good reason. Not to say there aren't many serious
people who struggle with connections and who this guys offering is a good fit
for, but his content strategy of sharing all these videos, even if a few have
nuggets of gold is going to annoy viewers much like a listicle does after you
click through to page 2 or 3 of a slide.

It's time to kill off this mantra of content, content content. We don't need
more content, we need content that can't be found anywhere else. (admittedly,
this guys content cant be found elsewhere, so that is a plus unless the
content continues to be boring and lacking insights.

If you can hire a content writer to run a few searches and write a well
written article...THAT IS NOT CONTENT WORTHY OF ROYALTY.

The only content that is king is content that you have to work hard to produce
that cannot be found by reading half a dozen articles you found with 2-3
google searches.

~~~
jakejake
I agree about the quality of those few pitches I watched. But if you notice
the red vs green monetary amount next to each video - all of them except one
were rejected. So you can skip and watch only the green ones, I'd assume, to
see the decent pitches.

I rather thought the videos were examples of what not to do, along with
constructive criticism explaining why.

------
SpeakMouthWords
Do they honestly believe that startups so close to death can actually turn
around with a sufficiently high probability that this investment is worth it?

If so, all power to them. They obviously know something others don't.

~~~
api
I'm sure the valuation cap will be low, and maybe SAFEs with a discount too.
It's corporate payday lending.

Not necessarily saying it's bad. Payday lending to poor consumers is scummy
because you're addicting them to high interest debt, but corporate finance is
different. A SAFE is not debt -- at least not to an individual -- and this
might rescue a few good companies with a high enough probability that it would
be worth it to the investors, founders, and economy as a whole. You're gonna
take some dilution but if you believe in your venture and persevere then...
well... as they say it's better to own 1% of success than 100% of failure. :)

~~~
tyingq
>>A SAFE is not debt -- - at least not to an individual

There's a dissolution clause that requires payback before any other
distribution of company assets. So, not an individual debt, but effectively
the same if there are any assets.

------
Alex3917
If they're going to video the interview and make it public then there needs to
be a minimum cap that's publicized on the website. Fair is fair.

This is pretty clever though, can't wait to see where it goes.

~~~
tyingq
The prominent placement of the "didn't fund this company" videos seems a bit
harsh, there's even a red background striked text label showing you how much
they were denied.

This particular thumbnail caught my eye...ouch:
[http://i.imgur.com/03f63JZ.png](http://i.imgur.com/03f63JZ.png)

~~~
Alex3917
Sure, that's their marketing. I don't think it would be unfair if the terms
were reasonable, right now they're not. But if there were a minimum cap and we
were talking 3 months of funding instead of one month then this would totally
be a viable option. Maybe not a first choice option, but at least a reasonable
backup plan.

------
japhyr
Can somebody with a better understanding of investment finances explain how
much SeedRamp gets for their investment?

I skimmed the agreement, but I don't quite know how to interpret it.

~~~
hobbyjogger
The agreement has a blank for the most meaningful term: the valuation cap. If
you raise a round below that cap (or just above it) the SAFE ends up being a
good deal. But if you raise the next round at a valuation significantly higher
than the valuation cap, you could take a haircut. For example, a $1MM cap
that's followed by a $15MM pre-money valuation at the Series A would give
SeedRamp a 93% discount on their equity. That's the risk.

TLDR: No way to tell what they might get for their investment until they offer
you a valuation cap (and even then it still depends on the future valuation
put on the company by the next equity round).

~~~
OliverJones
Beware beware. The investors in your next round WILL NOT LIKE THIS DEAL. Why?
Their money doesn't go to building your business, it goes to paying off this
SAFE.

~~~
hobbyjogger
They might not like it (especially if there's a large effective discount), but
that's not why.

If you raise a next round the SAFE _never_ gets paid off - it converts into
equity in the round. None of the equity investors' money is at risk of being
used to pay off the SAFE.

------
kumarski
Haters will hate, but they're doing it and there's nothing stopping them.

Gapjumpers, Stripe-o-Auth, and analytics viewing requests should be the
defacto standard for quick due diligence in the early stages.

Hell, give email access to the investors if it's not delicate info.
"o-auth"-ing in to see metrics etc,,, I think that will be the future of VC
investing. Also, more of the 1-10 founding team will have much more equity.

~~~
howareroark
I dunno. All we are talking about here is 10 videos and 5k spent over 3
months. I can't see how this is much more than a marketing gimmick to help
their name stand out from the pack.

I'm sure if something legit started brewing they would shut off the camera and
head to the fine dining spot.

Though maybe what you are saying is that the VC who wins is the one who
invests in a product that makes being a VC obsolete?

------
odonnellryan
Read a lot of comments here, and I don't know what's with the idea that you
need $1,000,000 to fund a startup.

Most of these startups could have the operating costs of the following:

1) $100/mo good, solid servers 2) $500/mo freelance illustrators and designers
(if that) 3) Time of the founder (if he's a programmer)

I know because I've made plenty of web apps for that. The difference is the
programmer's time was mine, so I got paid.

~~~
howareroark
From what I understand, a million is what you need to get you an "industry
presence" that creates a gravitational effect. Where in you prompt people to
join you vs competing with you.

5k-20k investments almost seem silly... Why not just bootstrap it yourself?

~~~
odonnellryan
Not everyone has that opportunity. Not everyone has rich friends or family.
Some people have expenses they cannot control.

You don't know everyone's situation, why do you assume to?

Later on, sure, you'll have to raise more money. Immediately, even $1k can
help you a lot depending on your situation...

Why not let the market take care of it?

~~~
vinceguidry
If you're in a rough spot, starting a company isn't likely to help out much.
You're far better off building a career and getting stable first.

If you have to start a company instead of getting a job for some reason, a
tech startup isn't the best choice for immediate cash flow. Particularly one
that requires investment to get off the ground.

There are knowledge, skills, and savviness gaps to bridge, unless you're a
serial entrepreneur, you won't have done this when you start. You need the
stability to weather through the failures caused by those gaps.

If you're a developer, you need time to understand the business world and the
business mindset. Alternatively, you can find someone who does, but in that
case you need to be able to properly vet business cofounders. You also need to
have the social skills to not blow up the relationship.

Asking an investor to fund you while you learn these lessons is unreasonable.
He has no clue how long it's going to take. If you approach one with an idea,
he is going to be looking at you as much as the idea, and they see dozens of
hopefuls just like you every day.

~~~
david927
That's a lot of reasoning but little insight. Very few people have 20k cash to
spend, world-wide. Some of them might have true innovation in their pockets.

The problem is, an investor _needs_ these people more than the other way
around. There this general pretense that when you're funded you've been
blessed by 'angels', but they need the big hit more than you do. And yet, they
won't budge. They refuse to see that it's a two-way relationship and so
everyone loses.

In other words, we don't have the innovation we all want partly because we are
so bad at figuring out how to connect funding to innovation. Currently, we use
inane heuristics, ego and bankrupt intuition -- and it's not working.

~~~
howareroark
I'm not sure 'true innovation' is what investors are looking for though. I
mean that's what they say because it 'sounds right'. In reality they want to
create a buzz and draw attention to something. I do agree that they need
people, but the good ones make sure they have the right network.

I think what they do is entirely based upon intuition and ego. If it was just
about making sure that things 'add up' a computer could do it and banks would
make big bucks. They need to be sure that the idea really can be big in
society, and that the founder is the type of person who will drive it there.

------
imaginenore
I thought YC gave little money, but $20K is just ridiculous. That would buy
you what, like a month of a senior dev time including all expenses.

It's absolutely awesome that they post all their interviews, such a great
idea.

~~~
boucher
For a long time Y Combinator gave less than this. For 6+% of the company.

~~~
morgante
The reputational and institutional benefits of YC dwarf their actual
investment (even now that they're investing $120k).

~~~
boucher
Which certainly wasn't true at the beginning.

~~~
morgante
True, but YC was specifically designed to provide funding for people who
otherwise wouldn't have access to capital. There's a reason that the first few
classes had many college students.

It turns out that their thesis was correct (that giving young, hungry founders
small amounts of capital would work well). That's why we've seen tons of
copycats, which have largely fulfilled that demand.

I suspect SeedRamp is going to suffer from some serious adverse selection
problems. I can't imagine anyone with better funding options turning to it.

------
danvoell
Any lawyers want to explain SAFE to me in simple terms?

~~~
hobbyjogger
A SAFE is basically a convertible note developed by YC[0] that is better for
founders (at least mechanically) than most traditional convertible notes. As
with other notes, the investor basically gives you money now in exchange for
some equity at your next round TBD by a fixed formula.

As I noted elsewhere, the devil is in the details and the SAFE could be a good
deal or an awful deal depending on the relationship between the SAFE's
valuation cap (which is left blank and would be negotiated with each company)
and the eventual pre-money valuation at the equity financing. I'd be surprised
if SR is giving very high valuation caps.

[0]
[https://www.ycombinator.com/documents/](https://www.ycombinator.com/documents/)

------
sergiotapia
Honest feedback: The videos taint the image of this VC. They should select
videos where the people applying actually show something interesting.

I couldn't watch any of the videos for more than 2 minutes because of the
rambling, and the hosts "Uh huh. Uh huh." responses to irrelevant details from
the applicants.

Interesting idea, polish the execution.

------
dennisgorelik
Could SeedRamp be a support business for Teamed.io? Fund technical startup
founders, 90% startups fail, so invite them to be project managers and team
leads on teamed.io projects?

[https://www.linkedin.com/in/yegor256](https://www.linkedin.com/in/yegor256)

------
iblaine
Payday loans for startups?

~~~
josh_carterPDX
I was thinking the same thing. If you're a new startup needing $20K with a low
cap and high equity take of your company, you may be in bigger trouble than
you think.

------
josh_carterPDX
If this is just about having a conversation with different Founders and
hearing more about their business, I'd be fine with it. I would be curious to
see what the cap is as well as the equity they're taking for $20K. Hope they
weren't hoping for a Board seat. ;)

------
collyw
Venture capital meets Cash Converters.

------
jaoued
It is a startup VC with a new model for investing (we may not all like it or
we may like it). It would be interesting if this is a model that could be an
alternative to current funding models. All the best to SR.

------
pcmaffey
I wonder if their primary market is for bridge loans to startups running out
of gas or to seed lots of fledglings as an alternative to accelerators,
without the "program" (YC started out giving 20k).

------
jorgecurio
I seriously don't get this. 20k for equity? You could loan 20,000 and still
pay it back at a modest interest rate.

What could you possibly do with 20,000? Buy Adwords? Hire someone for 3
months? Does it lead to more people investing?

Looks like they are just spraying 20k across the board in hopes to find
something that sticks.

You could easily get $20,000 to invest by working or even asking your family
or friends. Then you would have a far better chance of raising money with a
viable business that you won't have to get into bed with someone looking for
hockey stick growth that ultimately kills startups.

~~~
petergatsby
It's a tiny amount indeed, but not everyone looking to start a startup has
access to f&f with $20k to blow.

Their goal, for better or worse, seems to be to circumvent the relationship-
building part of fundraising at the earliest stages of startup development.

------
wehadfun
Is the credibility worth it? Does being able to tell investors that SR
invested in this mean anything?

------
howardtang
Mmhmm

