The prominent placement of the "didn't fund this company" videos seems a bit harsh, there's even a red background striked text label showing you how much they were denied.
Sure, that's their marketing. I don't think it would be unfair if the terms were reasonable, right now they're not. But if there were a minimum cap and we were talking 3 months of funding instead of one month then this would totally be a viable option. Maybe not a first choice option, but at least a reasonable backup plan.
Comments
The prominent placement of the "didn't fund this company" videos seems a bit harsh, there's even a red background striked text label showing you how much they were denied.
This particular thumbnail caught my eye...ouch: http://i.imgur.com/03f63JZ.png
Sure, that's their marketing. I don't think it would be unfair if the terms were reasonable, right now they're not. But if there were a minimum cap and we were talking 3 months of funding instead of one month then this would totally be a viable option. Maybe not a first choice option, but at least a reasonable backup plan.
Ironically, that particular interview is pretty positive.
It is in poor taste, for sure. That said, I am now watching that video to understand what went wrong.
Looks like a Trump company: you are fired!