> since two of their three exits are taking off the table, being exit to bigger ad comapny or aqui-hire leaving creating a profitable business on the table.
VC's don't generally see an aqui-hire as an 'exit', rather as a soft landing to ward off impending failure or as an early abort where it might still have worked.
Aqui-hire's are sometimes good for founders, rarely good for VC's unless the business was about to go bust and they recoup their original investment. That's definitely not a win.
VC's do try and recoup from a soft landing unless it was really a disaster. If you buying call options to capture a black swan, which is what vc's do, then the options that break even make a huge difference to your return distribution over time.
Of course they do. A soft landing is better than a total-loss. But it's not generally termed an 'exit' with a degree of success unless there is a multiple on the investment.
VC's don't generally see an aqui-hire as an 'exit', rather as a soft landing to ward off impending failure or as an early abort where it might still have worked.
Aqui-hire's are sometimes good for founders, rarely good for VC's unless the business was about to go bust and they recoup their original investment. That's definitely not a win.