I agree there are legit problems in the way valuations and fundraising gets reported. But what would you "prefer" they say?
I don't see leaking/reporting details of term sheets becoming a trend any time soon.
$150mm is ~1.6% of $9B. If they sold the whole company the day after this last round at the same price the last round paid the day before - without us guessing what random clauses might be in the term sheets or how much the bankers and lawyers might siphon off in fees (7% is not unheard of) - then the last round should just get their $150mm back or 1.6% of the total.
At least its not fake news. Mainly this is useless and inaccurate news. But it's info of interest to bloomberg audiences, many of whom know what valuation on paper means.
I agree it's misleading numbers for many newsreaders. What else could/should they report?
I don't see leaking/reporting details of term sheets becoming a trend any time soon.
$150mm is ~1.6% of $9B. If they sold the whole company the day after this last round at the same price the last round paid the day before - without us guessing what random clauses might be in the term sheets or how much the bankers and lawyers might siphon off in fees (7% is not unheard of) - then the last round should just get their $150mm back or 1.6% of the total.
At least its not fake news. Mainly this is useless and inaccurate news. But it's info of interest to bloomberg audiences, many of whom know what valuation on paper means.
I agree it's misleading numbers for many newsreaders. What else could/should they report?