Chapter Seven

To Infinity . . . and Beyond!

Going Big

Before you run these exercises

Chapter 7 covers three things most founders get wrong about money: how to size a raise, how to think about dilution, and why financial models matter even though the numbers will be wrong. There's a specific story in this chapter about a founder who was asking for the wrong amount — and what happened when she was pushed to think bigger. The lesson is counterintuitive and worth reading before you do the exercises.

The chapter also has a sharp section on the psychology of caution — why moving slowly feels like discipline but is actually a form of risk — and a practical framework for building a stage-based financial model without needing a finance background.

Claude
Exercise 01
Build Your Milestone-Based Raise Number

The chapter explains something most founders never figure out: there's a specific way VCs think about financial projections that is fundamentally different from how founders think about them — and that gap is where founders consistently handcuff themselves before they ever walk in the room. The full logic of why is in the book and worth reading before you do this exercise. What you'll find is that the number founders ask for, and the way they justify it, often signals exactly the wrong things.

The short version is this: your raise number should be built around milestones, not months — and specifically around the milestones that hit the sweet spot for the size of round you're targeting. VCs at different stages have check sizes that work for them, and a raise that's too small signals you don't understand the game you're playing. But you need current data on what those sweet spots actually are, not assumptions.

Claude can search the web for current round size data — no need to switch tools.

Prompt → Claude
I'm planning to raise a [pre-seed / seed / Series A] round for a company in [your category]. Before I set my raise number, I want to understand what round sizes are actually working right now — not two years ago. First, search the web and research: 1. What is the current typical range for [pre-seed / seed / Series A] rounds in [your category]? What's the floor, the median, and the ceiling that's getting done right now? 2. What check sizes do the most active investors at this stage typically write — and what's the minimum raise size that gets them interested vs. the size that starts to feel too large for their model? 3. Are there any signals that a raise number is "too small" for this stage — amounts that make sophisticated investors wonder if the founder doesn't understand the game? 4. What milestones are companies in this category typically hitting when they close this round — and how does the raise size correlate with where they are? I want current market data, not generic advice about round sizes. Then, using what you found, help me build my raise number using strategic budgeting — not operational budgeting. Here's my company: [describe what you're building, your current stage, and what you've proven so far] The distinction from Founder Unfriendly: - Operational budgeting = "what do I need to keep the lights on?" - Strategic budgeting = "what gets me to undeniable next-round proof?" Walk me through: 1. What is the single most important milestone that would make my next round an obvious yes in my specific category? 2. What does it realistically cost in people, product, and marketing to get there — push me to be specific about headcount and timelines, not just totals 3. Does my number land in the sweet spot that signals I understand how this stage works — or am I asking for too little and inadvertently signaling the wrong things? 4. What's the right fundraising cushion to add — the runway I'll need to actually run the next raise before I hit empty? 5. What's the final number, and what's the one-sentence narrative that makes it feel inevitable rather than arbitrary?
💡
The chapter's key line: "I've yet to meet a founder who sold their company for at least $100 million whose main regret was taking too much capital in their first round." The regrets run the other direction — always. Things cost twice as much and take three times as long. But beyond the cushion argument, there's a signaling argument: asking for $400K when the market is writing $1–2M checks for your stage tells an investor something about how you see yourself. Read the chapter for the full version of why.
Financial modeling
Claude
Exercise 03
Build Your Stage-Based Financial Model — and Find Who Can Gut-Check It

The chapter has a specific take on financial models that you won't hear from most people telling you to build one: the numbers will be 100% wrong, and building the model is still one of the most valuable things you can do. The reason why — and the way investors actually use your model against you or with you in a meeting — is something the chapter explains in a way that changes how you'll think about the whole exercise. This is a section worth reading closely before you start building.

What the chapter makes clear is that a financial model isn't a prediction. It's a test of your judgment — and investors are using it to probe the quality of your thinking, not the accuracy of your forecast. There's a specific exchange in the chapter between a founder and an investor that illustrates exactly what a great model answer sounds like versus a bad one. Read it. Then build yours.

The exercise below has two parts: building the model with Claude, and then identifying the specific people who can gut-check your assumptions before an investor does. That second part is where most founders leave value on the table.

Part 1 — Build the model

Prompt → Claude
Help me build a stage-based financial model using the framework from Founder Unfriendly. I want a model that shows the sequence of milestones and what it costs to move between them — not a month-by-month budget. The three stages: - Stage 1 (Build & Test): Get a working product to real users. Inputs: engineering, design, tools. Output: MVP in real users' hands. - Stage 2 (Founder-Driven Sales): Prove people will pay. Inputs: founder time, minimal GTM spend. Output: actual paying customers, not signups or LOIs. - Stage 3 (Gas on the Fire): Scale what's working. Inputs: sales team, marketing budget, more engineers. Output: consistent revenue growth and improving unit economics. Here's my company: [describe what you're building, your current stage, and what you've already proven] Ask me the questions needed to fill in each stage — one at a time. Specifically: - Don't let me use hardcoded % growth rows — ask me what actually drives each revenue number - Push me to ground every cost in something real: a quote, a conversation with a potential hire, a comparable I've researched - Ask me "what breaks if you go faster?" for each stage - Flag every assumption that's pulled from thin air At the end, give me the model as a structured summary I can build into a spreadsheet — and identify the 2–3 assumptions that are most important to validate and most likely to be wrong. If you have my Google Sheets MCP connected (via Claude's settings), write the model directly to a sheet for me — just ask me what to name it, or update an existing sheet I specify. If you don't have it connected, format the output as a table I can paste in manually.

Part 2 — Find your gut-checkers

A model built in isolation is just a spreadsheet. The assumptions that will get you in trouble in a meeting are the ones that sound reasonable to you but that someone with real experience in your function would immediately flag. Before an investor sees it, you want someone who has lived inside each part of your model to tell you where you're wrong.

Prompt → Claude copy & paste after building the model
Here are the key assumptions in my financial model: [paste the model summary from Part 1] For each major assumption, help me identify the profile of the person best positioned to gut-check it — and then help me find or approach them. Specifically: 1. For each assumption, what is the exact type of person whose real-world experience would make them credible to validate or challenge it? (e.g., "someone who has built and managed an outbound sales team in B2B SaaS at $0–$1M ARR" — not just "a salesperson") 2. For each profile, where do people like that congregate — what communities, events, LinkedIn signals, or networks would surface them? 3. Draft a short, specific outreach message I can send to someone fitting each profile — honest about what I'm asking them to look at and why their perspective specifically would be useful I'm not looking for general advisors. I'm looking for people who have done the exact function I'm modeling, at the exact scale I'm modeling, recently enough that the market conditions are still relevant.
💡
The chapter's best example: when an investor asks "why not double the pace of new location openings?" — a bad answer is "that would feel too fast." A great answer explains exactly what breaks, what it would cost to fix it, and what that does to the fundraising timeline. You can only give that answer if someone who has actually opened locations told you. The gut-checkers aren't just validating your model. They're arming you for the meeting.
Build something
Claude
Benchmark Your Milestones Against What Actually Gets Funded

The chapter makes a pointed observation: if you're building B2B SaaS in Oklahoma and don't know anyone who has raised venture, you have no idea whether what you think are milestones would actually read that way to an investor. The milestones that matter are category-specific — and you need live data to know what bar you're actually being measured against.

Claude can search the web for current milestone data in your category.

Prompt → Claude
I'm building [your company type — e.g., B2B SaaS for restaurant operators] and I'm about to raise a [pre-seed / seed / Series A]. I want to understand what milestones companies in my category actually had when they closed this round — not what the general advice says, but what the data shows. Please research: 1. What did companies in this specific category typically have at [your target stage] — revenue, customer count, growth rate, or other proof points — when they closed their round in the last 2 years? 2. What do the most active investors in this category say publicly about what they need to see at this stage? 3. Are there specific metrics that carry more weight in this category than others — e.g., NRR for SaaS, GMV for marketplaces, DAU/MAU for consumer? 4. What's the range — what did the weakest rounds that still closed look like, and what did the strongest look like? I want to know if my current milestones would put me in the fundable range or if I need to build more before I start pitching.
Before you move to Chapter 8

Chapter 7 is really about one thing: are you making decisions like a strategist or an accountant? The number you're raising, the milestones you're targeting, the pace you're moving at, the model you're building — all of it should be oriented around the next obvious yes, not the next obvious safe move.

Before you move on: know what your strategic raise number is and why, understand your dilution math correctly (multiplicative, not additive), and identify at least one place you've been calling caution what is actually hesitation. The model doesn't need to be right. It needs to show that you know how the business works.

Founder Unfriendly by Charlie O'Donnell. Published by Wiley.
Order the Book →
← Chapter 6: Keep Your Friends Close