High Resolution Fundraising
<img src="http://www.virtumundo.com/images/spacer.gif" height=15 width=1> Want to start a startup?
<img src="http://www.virtumundo.com/images/spacer.gif" height=15 width=1> 想要创业吗？
Get funded by Y Combinator .
获得 Y Combinator 的资助。
</td > September 2010 The reason startups have been using more convertible notes in angel rounds is that they make deals close faster.
</td> 2010 年 9 月 初创公司在天使轮融资中使用更多可转换票据的原因是它们可以更快地完成交易。
By making it easier for startups to give different prices to different investors, they help them break the sort of deadlock that happens when investors
通过让初创公司更容易向不同的投资者提供不同的价格，他们可以帮助他们打破投资者在投资时出现的僵局。
all wait to see who else is going to invest.
所有人都在等着看还有谁会投资。
By far the biggest influence on investors' opinions of a startup is the opinion of other investors.
到目前为止，对投资者对初创公司的看法影响最大的是其他投资者的看法。
There are very, very few who simply decide for themselves.
很少有人只是自己做决定。
Any startup founder can tell you the most common question they hear from investors is not about the founders or the product, but "who else is investing?" That tends to produce deadlocks.
任何初创公司的创始人都可以告诉你，他们从投资者那里听到的最常见的问题不是关于创始人或产品，而是“还有谁在投资？”这往往会产生僵局。
Raising an old-fashioned
培养一个老派
fixed-size equity round can take weeks, because all the angels sit around waiting for the others to commit, like competitors in a bicycle sprint who deliberately ride slowly at the start so they can follow whoever breaks first.
固定规模的股权融资可能需要数周的时间，因为所有的天使投资人都坐在周围等待其他人做出承诺，就像自行车短跑比赛中的竞争对手一样，他们在开始时故意骑得很慢，这样他们就可以跟随谁先突破。
Convertible notes let startups beat such deadlocks by rewarding investors willing to move first with lower (effective) valuations.
可转换票据让初创企业通过奖励愿意以较低（有效）估值率先采取行动的投资者来打破这种僵局。
Which they deserve because they're taking more risk.
这是他们应得的，因为他们承担了更多的风险。
It's much
这是很多
safer to invest in a startup Ron Conway has already invested in; someone who comes after him should pay a higher price.
投资 Ron Conway 已经投资过的初创公司更安全；追随他的人应该付出更高的代价。
The reason convertible notes allow more flexibility in price is that valuation caps aren't actual valuations, and notes are cheap and easy to do.
可转换票据在价格上具有更大灵活性的原因是估值上限不是实际估值，而且票据价格便宜且易于操作。
So you can do high-resolution fundraising: if you wanted you could have a separate note with a different cap for each investor.
因此，您可以进行高分辨率筹款：如果您愿意，您可以为每个投资者提供一个单独的票据，其中包含不同的上限。
That cap need not simply rise monotonically.
该上限不需要简单地单调上升。
A startup could
一家初创公司可以
also give better deals to investors they expected to help them most.
还向他们希望对他们最有帮助的投资者提供更好的交易。
The point is simply that different investors, whether because of the help they offer or their willingness to commit, have different values for startups, and their terms should reflect that.
关键在于，不同的投资者，无论是因为他们提供的帮助还是愿意承诺，对初创公司有不同的价值观，他们的条款应该反映这一点。
Different terms for different investors is clearly the way of the future.
针对不同投资者的不同条款显然是未来的发展方向。
Markets always evolve toward higher resolution.
市场总是朝着更高分辨率的方向发展。
You may not need to use convertible notes to do it.
您可能不需要使用可转换票据来做到这一点。
With sufficiently lightweight standardized equity terms (and some changes in investors' and lawyers' expectations about equity rounds) you might be able to do the same thing with equity instead of debt.
有了足够轻量级的标准化股权条款（以及投资者和律师对股权融资的期望发生一些变化），您也许可以用股权而不是债务来做同样的事情。
Either would be fine with startups, so long as they can easily change their valuation.
对于初创公司来说，这两种方法都可以，只要它们能够轻松改变估值。
Deadlocks weren't the only problem with fixed-size equity rounds.
僵局并不是固定规模股权轮次的唯一问题。
Another was that startups had to decide in advance how much to
另一个是初创公司必须提前决定要花多少钱
raise.
提高。
I think it's a mistake for a startup to fix upon a specific number.
我认为初创公司固定一个具体数字是错误的。
If investors are easily convinced, the startup should raise more now, and if investors are skeptical, the startup should take a smaller amount and use that to get the company to the point where it's more convincing.
如果投资者很容易被说服，那么初创公司现在应该筹集更多资金，如果投资者持怀疑态度，初创公司应该采取较小的金额，并利用它让公司达到更有说服力的地步。
It's just not reasonable to expect startups to pick an optimal round size in advance, because that depends on the reactions of investors,
期望初创公司提前选择最佳融资轮规模是不合理的，因为这取决于投资者的反应，
and those are impossible to predict.
而这些是无法预测的。
Fixed-size, multi-investor angel rounds are such a bad idea for startups that one wonders why things were ever done that way.
对于初创公司来说，固定规模、多投资者的天使轮融资是一个糟糕的主意，以至于人们想知道为什么要这样做。
One possibility is that this custom reflects the way investors like to collude when they can get away with it.
一种可能性是，这种习惯反映了投资者在能够逃脱惩罚时喜欢串通的方式。
But I think the actual explanation is less sinister.
但我认为实际的解释并没有那么险恶。
I think angels (and their lawyers) organized rounds this way in unthinking imitation of VC series A
我认为天使（和他们的律师）以这种方式组织回合是不假思索地模仿了 VC A 轮融资
rounds.
回合。
In a series A, a fixed-size equity round with a lead makes sense, because there is usually just one big investor, who is unequivocally the lead.
在 A 轮融资中，领先的固定规模股权融资是有意义的，因为通常只有一个大投资者，而他无疑是领先者。
Fixed-size series A rounds already are high res.
固定尺寸的 A 轮融资已经是高分辨率了。
But the more investors you have in a round, the less sense it makes for everyone to get the same price.
但一轮中的投资者越多，每个人获得相同价格的意义就越小。
The most interesting question here may be what high res fundraising will do to the world of investors.
这里最有趣的问题可能是高分辨率筹款将对投资者世界产生什么影响。
Bolder investors will now get
大胆的投资者现在将获得
rewarded with lower prices.
获得较低价格的奖励。
But more important, in a hits-driven business, is that they'll be able to get into the deals they want.
但更重要的是，在热门驱动的行业中，他们将能够达成他们想要的交易。
Whereas the "who else is investing?" type of investors will not only pay higher prices, but may not be able to get into the best deals at all.
而“还有谁在投资？”这类投资者不仅会支付更高的价格，而且可能根本无法获得最佳交易。
Thanks to Immad Akhund, Sam Altman, John Bautista, Pete Koomen, Jessica Livingston, Dan Siroker, Harj Taggar, and Fred Wilson for reading drafts of this.
感谢 Immad Akhund、Sam Altman、John Bautista、Pete Koomen、Jessica Livingston、Dan Siroker、Harj Taggar 和 Fred Wilson 阅读本文的草稿。