Connect with us

Business

Founders are getting huge paydays before their startups are close to an exit—and that’s fine with many VCs

Published

on



Good morning, it’s Crypto Editor Jeff Roberts pinch-hitting for Allie. Over the course of my career, I’ve written many stories along the lines of “Buzzy new startup raises $50 million.” Imagine my surprise then when I learned that, in recent years, those splashy headline numbers are not always what they seem. In a growing number of deals, it turns out, a chunk of the money raised doesn’t go to the startup, but instead into the pockets of the founder.

That was the case with crypto payments firm Mesh, which announced an $82 million Series B this year that included a $20 million payout to its founder. Ditto with the blockchain social network firm Farcaster, which raised an eye-popping $150 million Series A, but saw its CEO carve off at least $15 million of that. You can read about other examples here.

These payouts—which are totally above board—take place by means of secondary sales that involve venture firms purchasing some of the founder’s personal stock during a round. In VC-speak, the practice is called “taking some off the table” and it’s common during frothy markets. During the crypto boom that tailed off in 2021, for instance, the founders of firms like OpenSea and MoonPay collected eight-figure payouts.  

VC firms and founders, unsurprisingly, are not eager to talk about the practice. After all, cashing in early clashes with the Silicon Valley ideal of the founder who would never dream of selling their stock because they are so sure their startup is going all the way. It’s not unusual for founders to sell some shares at a later stage “so they don’t have to worry about the mortgage,” in the words of one VC, but an eight-figure Series A or B payday—well before it’s clear a startup will succeed—feels different.

When I spoke with investors from small firms, they blamed large crypto VC firms for dangling sweetheart secondary arrangements in order to be the lead on a deal. A person at one of those large firms, in turn, blamed generalist firms charging into the crypto market for the proliferation of these arrangements.

My reporting focused on crypto deals, but it’s a safe bet that founders in other hot sectors like AI are also “taking some off the table” in early rounds. The question is whether this matters.

Venture investors told me that many crypto founders are rich already, so a big Series A payout is unlikely to undermine the incentive they have to build their company. They also claimed they’ve seen no evidence that a founder who hits an early jackpot will grind less hard than one who hasn’t. And, after all, the nature of venture is that most bets don’t work out so does it matter if one portion of a losing bet on a portfolio company went to a founder?

Still, there is an ick factor. Most Americans don’t begrudge Mark Zuckerberg or Jeff Bezos for being obscenely wealthy since, well, they built awesome companies used by everyone. But do they feel the same about a crypto founder who gets filthy rich without building anything of note? The situation is also awkward since, as one female founder wrote me, these early stage payouts may reflect a vote of confidence in men that is not always extended to women.

Venture capital, of course, is hardly the only realm where people can get very rich without accomplishing much. In the sports world, my poor Toronto Blue Jays—reeling from a brutal Game 7 loss to the Dodgers—paid $27 million this year to slugger Anthony Santander only to see him post negative returns (WAR in baseball terms). That’s just how it goes.

And while it’s tempting to raise eyebrows against overpaid startup founders, how many of us would act any differently? If someone offered me $15 million to write columns about venture capital and nobody read them, I don’t know if I’d feel bad. What I do know is that, when the current boom time ends, VCs will rue some of the big checks they wrote to unproven founders. And then they will do it all over again during the next hot market.

Jeff John Roberts
X:
 @jeffjohnroberts
Email: jeff.roberts@fortune.com
Submit a deal for the Term Sheet newsletter here.

Joey Abrams curated the deals section of today’s newsletter. Subscribe here.

VENTURE DEALS

Reevo, a Santa Clara, Calif.-based AI-powered revenue operating system, raised $80 million in funding. Khosla Ventures and Kleiner Perkins led the round.

Upway, a Los Angeles, Calif. and Brooklyn, N.Y.-based refurbished e-bike company, raised $60 million in Series C funding. A.P. Moller led the round and was joined by Galvanize, Ora Global, and others.

Inception, a Palo Alto, Calif.-based platform for developing AI models, raised $50 million in funding. Menlo Ventures led the round and was joined by Mayfield, Innovation Endeavors, NVentures, and others.

DeepJudge, a Zurich, Switzerland-based company developing search engines for law firms, raised $41.2 million in Series A funding. Felicis led the round and was joined by Coatue.

Daylight, a Tel Aviv, Israel-based agentic AI-powered managed security services company, raised $33 million in Series A funding. Craft Ventures led the round and was joined by Bain Capital Ventures, Maple VC, and others.

Procurement Sciences, a Washington, D.C.-based AI-powered platform designed to automate the processes for businesses to secure and fulfill government contracts, raised $30 million in Series B funding. Catalyst Investors led the round and was joined by others.

DualBird, a Westborough, Mass.-based data infrastructure company, raised $25 million in combined seed and Series A funding. Lightspeed Venture Partners led the round and was joined by Bessemer Venture Partners, Angular Ventures, and Uncork Capital.

Parable, a Brooklyn, N.Y.-based intelligence layer for enterprise operations, raised $16.5 million in seed funding. HOF Capital led the round and was joined by Story Ventures, InMotion Ventures, and others.

Evotrex, a Los Angeles, Calif.-based smart, power-generating RV company, raised $16 million in pre-Series A funding from Unity Ventures, Kylinhall Partners, and others.

Ridepanda, a San Francisco-based company providing e-bikes as an employer sponsored benefit, raised $12.6 million in funding from Bikeleasing Group, Blackhorn Ventures, Yamaha Motor Ventures, and others.

Fintary, a San Francisco-based AI-powered revenue growth platform, raised $10 million in Series A funding. Infinity Ventures led the round and was joined by Sierra Ventures and others.

Malanta, a Makabim-Re’ut, Israel-based AI-powered pre-attack prevention platform, raised $10 million in seed funding. Cardumen Capital led the round and was joined by The Group Ventures.

Tsuga, a Paris, France-based AI-powered observability company, raised $10 million in seed funding. General Catalyst led the round and was joined by Singular.

Hepta, a Foster City, Calif.-based company using AI and analysis of cell-free DNA to identify chronic disease, raised $6.7 million in seed funding. Felicis Ventures and Illumina Ventures led the round and were joined by SeaX Ventures, Alumni Ventures, and AME Cloud Ventures.

Freeda, a Paris, France-based company using AI to find errors in construction plans, raised €3.4 million ($3.9 million) in funding. Frst led the round and was joined by Brick & Mortar Ventures.

OneLot, a Manila, Philippines-based financing platform for used car dealers, raised $3.3 million in seed funding. Accion Ventures and 468 Capital led the round and were joined by Everywhere Ventures, Seedstars, and others.

Planbase, a San Francisco-based AI-powered employee management platform, raised $2.1 million in funding from Y Combinator, LocalGlobe, and angel investors.

PRIVATE EQUITY

CBRE acquired Pearce Services, a Paso Robles, Calif.-based provider of advanced technical services for digital and power infrastructure, for approximately $1.2 billion in cash.

Axiom GRC, backed by Inflexion, acquired IS Partners, a Philadelphia, Penn.-based cyber assurance and compliance services company. Financial terms were not disclosed.

Bid Equity acquired Cuseum, a Boston, Mass.-based provider of visitor and member engagement software for museums and institutions. Financial terms were not disclosed.

Global Guardian, backed by Align Capital Partners, acquired Solace Global Risk, a Poole, U.K.-based risk management and security services company. Financial terms were not disclosed.

TPG agreed to acquire a 70% stake in Kinetic, a Melbourne, Australia-based bus and mass transit operator. Financial terms were not disclosed.

FUNDS + FUNDS OF FUNDS

CMT Digital, a Chicago, Ill.-based venture capital firm, raised $136 million for its fourth fund focused on companies building the infrastructure and applications for cryptocurrency adoption.

MVP Ventures, a San Francisco-based venture capital firm, raised $125 million for its second fund focused on companies in AI, defense, and frontier tech.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Quant who said passive era is ‘worse than Marxism’ doubles down

Published

on



Inigo Fraser Jenkins once warned that passive investing was worse for society than Marxism. Now he says even that provocative framing may prove too generous.

In his latest note, the AllianceBernstein strategist argues that the trillions of dollars pouring into index funds aren’t just tracking markets — they are distorting them. Big Tech’s dominance, he says, has been amplified by passive flows that reward size over substance. Investors are funding incumbents by default, steering more capital to the biggest names simply because they already dominate benchmarks.

He calls it a “dystopian symbiosis”: a feedback loop between index funds and platform giants like Apple Inc., Microsoft Corp. and Nvidia Corp. that concentrates power, stifles competition, and gives the illusion of safety. Unlike earlier market cycles driven by fundamentals or active conviction, today’s flows are automatic, often indifferent to risk.

Fraser Jenkins is hardly alone in sounding the alarm. But his latest critique has reignited a debate that’s grown harder to ignore. Just 10 companies now account for more than a third of the S&P 500’s value, with tech names driving an outsize share of 2025’s gains.

“Platform companies and a lack of active capital allocation both imply a less effective form of capitalism with diminished competition,” he wrote in a Friday note. “A concentrated market and high proportion of flows into cap weighted ‘passive’ indices leads to greater risks should recent trends reverse.” 

While the emergence of behemoth companies might be reflective of more effective uses of technology, it could also be the result of failures of anti-trust policies, among other things, he argues. Artificial intelligence might intensify these issues and could lead to even greater concentrations of power among firms. 

His note, titled “The Dystopian Symbiosis: Passive Investing and Platform Capitalism,” is formatted as a fictional dialog between three people who debate the topic. One of the characters goes as far as to argue that the present situation requires an active policy intervention — drawing comparisons to the breakup of Standard Oil at the start of the 20th century — to restore competition.

data-srcyload

In a provocative note titled “The Silent Road to Serfdom: Why Passive Investing is Worse Than Marxism” and written nearly a decade ago, Fraser Jenkins argued that the rise of index-tracking investing would lead to greater stock correlations, which would impede “the efficient allocation of capital.” His employer, AllianceBernstein, has continued to launch ETFs since the famous research was published, though its launches have been actively managed. 

Other active managers have presented similar viewpoints — managers at Apollo Global Management last year said the hidden costs of the passive-investing juggernaut included higher volatility and lower liquidity. 

There have been strong rebuttals to the critique: a Goldman Sachs Group Inc. study showed the role of fundamentals remains an all-powerful driver for stock valuations; Citigroup Inc. found that active managers themselves exert a far bigger influence than their passive rivals on a stock’s performance relative to its industry.

“ETFs don’t ruin capitalism, they exemplify it,” said Eric Balchunas, Bloomberg Intelligence’s senior ETF analyst. “The competition and innovation are through the roof. That is capitalism in its finest form and the winner in that is the investor.”

Since Fraser Jenkins’s “Marxism” note, the passive juggernaut has only grown. Index-tracking ETFs, which have grown in popularity thanks to their ease of trading and relatively cheaper management fees, are often cited as one of the primary culprits in this debate. The segment has raked in $842 billion so far this year, compared with the $438 billion hauled in by actively managed funds, even as there are more active products than there are passive ones, data compiled by Bloomberg show. Of the more than $13 trillion that’s in ETFs overall, $11.8 trillion is parked in passive vehicles. The majority of ETF ownership is concentrated in low-cost index funds that have significantly reduced the cost for investors to access financial markets. 

In Fraser Jenkins’s new note, one of his fictitious characters ask another what the “dystopian symbiosis” implies for investors. 

“The passive index is riskier than it has been in the past,” the character answers. “The scale of the flows that have been disproportionately into passive cap-weighted funds with a high exposure to the mega cap companies implies the risk of a significant negative wealth effect if there is an upset to expectations for those large companies.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Why the timing was right for Salesforce’s $8 billion acquisition of Informatica — and for the opportunities ahead

Published

on



The must-haves for building a market-leading business include vision, talent, culture, product innovation and customer focus. But what’s the secret to success with a merger or acquisition? 

I was asked about this in the wake of Salesforce’s recently completed $8 billion acquisition of Informatica. In part, I believe that people are paying attention because deal-making is up in 2025. M&A volume reached $2.2 trillion in the first half of the year, a 27% increase compared to a year ago, according to JP Morgan. Notably, 72% of that volume involved deals greater than $1 billion. 

There will be thousands of mergers and acquisitions in the United States this year across industries and involving companies of all sizes. It’s not unusual for startups to position themselves to be snapped up. But Informatica, founded in 1993, didn’t fit that mold. We have been building, delivering, supporting and partnering for many years. Much of the value we bring to Salesforce and its customers is our long-earned experience and expertise in enterprise data management. 

Although, in other respects, a “legacy” software company like ours — founded well before cloud computing was mainstream — and early-stage startups aren’t so different. We all must move fast and differentiate. And established vendors and growth-oriented startups have a few things in common when it comes to M&A, as well. 

First and foremost is a need to ensure that the strategies of the two companies involved are in alignment. That seems obvious, but it’s easier said than done. Are their tech stacks based on open protocols and standards? Are they cloud-native by design? And, now more than ever, are they both AI-powered and AI-enabling? All of these came together in the case of Salesforce and Informatica, including our shared belief in agentic AI as the next major breakthrough in business technology.

Don’t take your foot off the gas

In the days after the acquisition was completed, I was asked during a media interview if good luck was a factor in bringing together these two tech industry stalwarts. Replace good luck with good timing, and the answer is a resounding, “Yes!”

As more businesses pursue the productivity and other benefits of agentic AI, they require high-quality data to be successful. These are two areas where Salesforce and Informatica excel, respectively. And the agentic AI opportunity — estimated to grow to $155 billion by 2030 — is here and now. So the timing of the acquisition was perfect. 

Tremendous effort goes into keeping an organization on track, leading up to an acquisition and then seeing it through to a smooth and successful completion. In the few months between the announcement of Salesforce’s intent to acquire Informatica and the close, we announced new partnerships and customer engagements and a fall product release that included autonomous AI agents, MCP servers and more. 

In other words, there’s no easing into the new future. We must maintain the pace of business because the competitive environment and our customers require it. That’s true whether you’re a small, venture-funded organization or, like us, an established firm with thousands of employees and customers. Going forward we plan to keep doing what we do best: help organizations connect, manage and unify their AI data. 

Out with the old, in with the new

It’s wrong to think of an acquisition as an end game. It’s a new chapter. 

Business leaders and employees in many organizations have demonstrated time and again that they are quite good at adapting to an ever-changing competitive landscape. A few years ago, we undertook a company-wide shift from on-premises software to cloud-first. There was short-term disruption but long-term advantage. It’s important to develop an organizational mindset that thrives on change and transformation, so when the time comes, you’re ready for these big steps. 

So, even as we take pride in all that we accomplished to get to this point, we now begin to take on a fresh identity as part of a larger whole. It’s an opportunity to engage new colleagues and flourish professionally. And importantly, customers will be the beneficiaries of these new collaborations and synergies. On the day Informatica was welcomed into the Salesforce family and ecosystem, I shared my feeling that “the best is yet to come.” That’s my North Star and one I recommend to every business leader forging ahead into an M&A evolution — because the truest measure of success ultimately will be what we accomplish next.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

The ‘Great Housing Reset’ is coming: Income growth will outpace home-price growth in 2026

Published

on



Homebuyers may experience a reprieve in 2026 as price normalization and an increase in home sales over the next year will take some pressure off the market—but don’t expect homebuying to be affordable in the short run for Gen Z and young families.

The “Great Housing Reset” will start next year, with income growth outpacing home-price growth for a prolonged period for the first time since the Great Recession era, according to a Redfin report released this week. 

The residential real estate brokerage sees mortgage rates in the low-6% range, down from down from the 2025 average of 6.6%; a median home sales price increase of just 1%, down from 2% this year; and monthly housing payments growth that will lag behind wage growth, which will remain steady at 4%.

These trends toward increased affordability will likely bring back some house hunters to the market, but many Gen Zers and young families will opt for nontraditional living situations, according to the report. 

More adult children will be living with their parents, as households continue to shift further away from a nuclear family structure, Redfin predicted.

“Picture a garage that’s converted into a second primary suite for adult children moving back in with their parents,” the report’s authors wrote. “Redfin agents in places like Los Angeles and Nashville say more homeowners are planning to tailor their homes to share with extended family.”

Gen Z and millennial homeownership rates plateaued last year, with no improvement expected. Just over one-quarter of Gen Zers owned their home in 2024, while the rate for millennial owners was 54.9% in the same year.

Meanwhile, about 6% of Americans who struggled to afford housing as of mid-2025 moved back in with their parents, while another 6% moved in with roommates. Both trends are expected to increase in 2026, according to the report.

Obstacles to home affordability 

Despite factors that could increase affordability for prospective homebuyers, C. Scott Schwefel, a real estate attorney at Shipman, Shaiken & Schwefel, LLC, told Fortune that income growth and home-price growth are just a few keys to sustainable homeownership. 

An improved income-to-price ratio is welcome, but unless tax bills stabilize, many households may not experience a net relief, Schwefel said.

“Prospective buyers need to recognize that affordability is not just price versus income…it’s price, mortgage rate and the annual bill for living in a place—and that bill includes property taxes,” he added.

In November, voters—especially young ones—showed lowering housing costs is their priority, the report said. But they also face high sale prices and mortgage rates, inflated insurance premiums, and potential utility costs hikes due to a data center construction boom that’s driving up energy bills. The report’s authors expect there to be a bipartisan push to help remedy the housing affordability crisis.

Still, an affordable housing market for first-time home buyers and young families still may be far away.

“The U.S. housing market should be considered moving from frozen to thawing,” Sergio Altomare, CEO of Hearthfire Holdings, a real estate private equity and development company, told Fortune

“Prices aren’t surging, but they’re no longer falling,” he added. “We are beginning to unlock some activity that’s been trapped for a couple of years.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.