> While this is a capital intensive business, if you cannot create a path to profitability after being handed 100 million I don't see how raising more money could help.
The past few years have proven this wrong. A lot of companies raised far more than that and just recently (relatively) became profitable. Uber, Tesla, and even going back a bit, Facebook.
100 million was a tiny amount of what was needed for them to become profitable.
The rest I agree with though.
blue-ox
Another pitfall was not staying scrappy. The company was incredibly hierarchical and a bit top heavy, with dozens of directors and VPs. A lot of people hired based on mere "background" i.e. worked in cleantech previously rather than based on ability to lead or build. Departments were fairly siloed as a result of the management layers.
codingdave
Was this your first startup experience?
Because nothing here seems out of the norm for startups. Most of them are sketchy strategically, just that some figure it out before running out of runway.
The past few years have proven this wrong. A lot of companies raised far more than that and just recently (relatively) became profitable. Uber, Tesla, and even going back a bit, Facebook.
100 million was a tiny amount of what was needed for them to become profitable.
The rest I agree with though.