Adel Anwar
Jul 24, 2017 · 3 min read

I wrote this before reading the above — when a friend advertised it.

I have to admit — am both surprised by [The title:Make Money: Don’t Raise Money ] Gary Vee and on the other hand , I feel that I understand him. I feel that the only way to answer this conundrum is to get more nuanced and into finer granular detail.

Should an entrepreneur raise money or not ?

The best way for an entrepreneur to get ahead is to have sufficient capital to do things like marketing, paying his own bills happily, being able to hire in order to do what she has to do to run a real business, compete and out compete.

On the other hand, the current day philosophy is on lean, agile, minimum viable product, demonstrating that it works and has potential (with metrics) , and further that one has oneself created these results (instead of showing metrics of other people to gain funding).

What to do ?

Companies that were turned down include Google search (there were/are so many other search engines — many forgotten today like aol, lycos, askjeeves, yahoo and more); Zuckerberg showed NO-monetization and was rejected vehemently up and down the East coast — and besides others were doing very well like MySpace for example.

But the above needed funding to grow. interestingly the above had metrics and showed massive growth ‘potential’ (this word being quantifiable instead of merely vacuous). Zuck had extraordinary growth and people were hanging around facebook too . People were using google search.

So it comes down to this perhaps:

-> its not about yes or no to entrepreneurs getting funding.

-> it appears that there must be quantifiable potential shown (and interestingly it also appears the quantifiable metric does not have to be money!)

_____________________________________________

There’s some more issues such as ‘from who’s perspective’ is one answering the question: ‘should an entrepreneur raise money or not ?’

From an entrepreneur’s perspective — if one can indeed persuade others to fund one then it can be a huge bonanza if one can get away with it !

From a funder’s perspective — its a different story. Should one fund another? That depends upon many factors, but I would guess my earlier academic argument could be set as a criteria?

________________________________________________

Its a complex world (the word complex being used in a scientific sense, different to the colloquial use). That means there are often many factors involved.

In analogy, as leader of a nation — should one deal with Russia or not? Many factors are involved.

Yes on some levels. For example with such a powerful nation, it is important to keep lines of communication — and have some trade (have some significant influence).

No on other levels. Yet due to misbehaviors, one can’t just deal with this nation in a carte blanche fashion!

Interestingly the executive branch of government shows friendship. I think this can be wise.

The Legislative branch (Congress) enacts punitive laws . Further they are not welcome back to the extra property on U.S. soil.

In one of James Bond movies during the cold war, secret agents were making love. Together they destroyed a third party. They were caught making love though by their superiors. The British government minister exclaims “GOOD GOD DOULE-O SEVEN! WHAT ARE YOU DOING?”

Bond ends the movie with “Keeping the British End up, Sir!” and closes the hatch to his escape pod!

Things are complex :) !

PARTY ON FOLKS !

Adel

    Adel Anwar

    Written by