Great response, and thanks.
Is there a point, given the struggles many companies will have in the Series A to Series B transition that the VC community accepts that it’s “normal” and “ok” to just crush the Series A investors and keep the founders’ shares at par?
If the question is “this company folds without new investment” or “we take a massive haircut on our Series A but have something, not nothing after the Series B” shouldn’t the rational VC take the “something not nothing” deal?
The Series A investors made bad choices, suffered bad luck, or whatever. But if the company is otherwise something Series B would “gladly fund” isn’t there a point where saving the company and rebooting is the “right thing to do” and the Series B investors don’t suffer a reputational hit when they execute the necessary haircut on the Series A investors?