There's usually a lot more smart-but-unproven people with hazy unproven ideas that want financing than there is venture money to go around. Hence, bad terms.
Right, but bad VC terms shouldn't even exist. There are a lot of bad ideas out there and a few good ones. VCs are "supposed" to be the ones who can pick out the good deals; that's why they get paid their high salaries. If the deal is good, the terms should be good because the VC wants the founders to have high morale and a successful company. If the deal is bad, the VC shouldn't fund it at all.
I wouldn't be insulted or offended if a VC rejected me. I'd expect quite a few rejections. Multiple liquidation preferences are an insult; it says "we think you're fucking pathetic; here are some scraps".
Right, but bad VC terms shouldn't even exist. There are a lot of bad ideas out there and a few good ones. VCs are "supposed" to be the ones who can pick out the good deals; that's why they get paid their high salaries. If the deal is good, the terms should be good because the VC wants the founders to have high morale and a successful company. If the deal is bad, the VC shouldn't fund it at all.
I wouldn't be insulted or offended if a VC rejected me. I'd expect quite a few rejections. Multiple liquidation preferences are an insult; it says "we think you're fucking pathetic; here are some scraps".