wp-plugin-hostgator
domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init
action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114ol-scrapes
domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init
action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114Source:https:\/\/techcrunch.com\/2023\/04\/17\/late-stage-startups-spending-less\/<\/a><\/br> Back when Silicon<\/span> Valley Bank was still pitching a package of financial moves to its customers, it noted in a presentation<\/a> to its own investors that \u201celevated client cash burn\u201d was \u201cpressuring [its] balance of fund flows.\u201d<\/p>\n The previously central bank to Silicon Valley told the stock market that while it had anticipated a \u201cmodest, progressive\u201d decline in startup cash consumption as venture dollars slowed, burn had \u201cnot moderated\u201d in the first quarter of 2023. This hurt its deposit base, which in turn was a precipitating factor in the run that later smashed the bank.<\/p>\n The Exchange explores startups, markets and money. <\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Read it every morning on TechCrunch+<\/a> or get The Exchange newsletter<\/a> every Saturday.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Reading through the bank\u2019s notes before it failed a few dozen hours later, this column pulled out the burn statistic<\/a> as the most interesting nugget from SVB\u2019s asset sale and debt shakeup. Whoops<\/a>.<\/p>\n Regardless of our inability to note an incipient bank run, the dataset formed an interesting conclusion in our minds: Startups were failing, at least in the United States, to truly reduce their burn rates.<\/p>\n New data paints a slightly more nuanced picture. Thanks to Brex data shared with SaaSletter<\/a>, we can get a bit more granular. It turns out that when you compare later-stage startup spending cuts with their earlier peers, the bigger startups are doing a better job.<\/p>\n The question, then, is whether that makes sense. Let\u2019s explore.<\/p>\n Recall that in the first quarter we saw late-stage round sizes and valuations fall sharply<\/a>. Capital flowing into larger, more richly valued startups is in retreat, and unicorns are currently wedged<\/a> between a rock (falling venture capital investment), a hard place (a completely dead IPO market and slow M&A activity for companies of their size) and a rocky hard place (the fact that many late-stage startups are carrying paper valuations that will not convert into new investment at par).<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n <\/br><\/br><\/br><\/p>\n
\nLate-stage startups are getting the hang of spending less<\/br>
\n2023-04-17 21:47:37<\/br><\/p>\n
\n
\nCut spend, cut burn<\/h2>\n