Venture Capital & Investing

A Fundraising Reply from Three and a Half Years Ago: Test the Market Before Naming a Price

Share this article
LINEFacebook

Robin’s retrospective on his own practice

Storage information

Bookmarks and reading positions are stored in this browser. Manage and back them up in My Reading.

Collected in Robin Shen’s Field Notes · Content type and attribution are shown above

English translation of the Chinese post originally published 2023-02-25. Translated 2026-10-27 with AI assistance. Historical figures and claims have not been updated or independently verified. 中文原文

Reading guide

Robin also received the fundraising email behind a controversy in e-commerce, with details omitted to protect those involved. It was sent in September 2019, before the pandemic, when liquidity was relatively ample and some money was moving from technology stocks to ‘new consumption.’ Nobody foresaw a three-year pandemic and the subsequent funding winter. Robin rejected the approach for two reasons. First, the asking price was so unrealistic that it removed any incentive to continue the discussion: test the market before naming a price. Second, intellectual-property-based products and toys lay outside his interests and knowledge. It is hard to earn beyond one’s understanding, and without convincing himself he could hardly convince his boss.

Key points

  • Test the market before pricing a fundraising round; unrealistic demands kill interest in further discussion.
  • Avoid unfamiliar fields: earning beyond one’s understanding is difficult.
  • In 2019, nobody anticipated a three-year pandemic and the funding winter.
  • A more mature company in the same segment made the choice natural at the time.
Trees at different stages of growth with connected roots on cream paper, suggesting patient cultivation and lasting value.
Venture capital & investmentThematic illustration · AI generated

Full text — English translation

I hear this is a controversy in e-commerce circles. Judging by the email’s date, it was about three and a half years ago. I also received an email discussing fundraising; I have redacted details to protect several people involved. The most obvious factor is the pandemic, which lasted three years. The email was actually sent in September 2019, before the outbreak. Most entrepreneurs did not anticipate a pandemic, much less one lasting so long. It disrupted many original plans. September 2019 was indeed a period of relatively ample market liquidity. Some capital was moving from technology stocks in search of ‘new consumption’ and ‘consumption upgrading.’ Of course, the pandemic described above and the subsequent funding winter followed. Back to fundraising. 1. My immediate reaction was that the asking price was absurdly unrealistic. It left me with no motivation to learn more or continue talking, so I wrote a direct rejection. Fundraising still requires a clear understanding of your stage and the overall market environment. Before naming a price, sound out the market. Do not make sky-high demands from a self-satisfied world of your own. 2. Another reason, which I did not include in my reply, was that I knew very little about intellectual-property-based products and toys and had little interest in them. This relates to the investment professional’s own interests, capabilities, and boundaries of understanding. I also believe it is difficult to earn money beyond what you understand. Without interest or passion, I could not persuade my boss. At the time, there was probably a more mature toy and figurine distribution company whose logo was a lion(?). If investing in that segment, my instinct was that choosing the lion would be much more reasonable. 3. I have written quite a few Facebook posts on fundraising; you can consult those too.

These articles are personal notes, book excerpts, and collected reprints. Figures and events reflect the time of the original publication, are not current information, and do not constitute investment advice.

Share this article
LINEFacebook

DISCUSSION

Reader comments

What did this article make you think about? Different perspectives and constructive criticism are welcome.

Comments are public immediately. Do not include personal contact details or external links. Automated checks block suspicious solicitation, prohibited transactions and spam; they can make mistakes.

0 / 2000

Comments load when you reach this section.

    Administrator sign-in

    My reading notes

    These notes stay in this browser and are not published. Writing a note also saves the article. Back up or move your notes in My Reading.

    Manage my bookmarks and notes →

    STAY CURIOUS

    Save a good question for your next visit.

    Save this article, or follow the Facebook page and RSS feed for additions. Historical articles retain their original publication dates.

    Browse All articlesSearch articles and full text →