Flotrack Nets $8M Financing Deal

You guys are delusional to think anyone at FT is taking home any piece of this immaterial 8mm financing or whatever capital you think exists. The size of it immediately gives away their financial situation. Start-ups 101 ~ the people with money always own you, period. The founders have zero leverage at this point. If this business had any promise they wouldn't need 8mm financing after all these years, that is peanuts. These guys are likely going to pack up and go home with thumbs up their as*ses... That is if they don't end up working for free for another year or so.

Cyclists were smart and stopped paying attention to these yahoos a few years ago.

This is a series A financing. A VC company has taken an ownership stake. The $8 million is an investment stake based on an agreed upon valuation of the company. The founder retains a stake as well. If the company doesn't need another round of financing and then exits through acquisition, the investors will hope to recoup their $8 million plus some multiple based on what they judge the total value of the company to be in the open market.

You can guarantee there was a nice payday for the Executives "in their roles as employees" at Flocasts. Mr. Wan and Causeway Media Partners got a nice chunk in exchange.

I might actually like Flotrack if it wasnt for their complete idiot broadcasters. Those fools kill it for me.

Another FACEBOOK casualty wrote:

It looks like a buyout, that's all. My guess is the buyer will fold in the server code, liquidate assets, payoff debts, and shut down FT.

??

And how does the buyer think they will recoup, or profit from their investment by shutting down? It's not a competition elimination move, flotrack would not seem to have any real IP of note, do they? Where is the value, absent continuing operations?

Mi Man wrote:

I might actually like Flotrack if it wasnt for their complete idiot broadcasters. Those fools kill it for me.

Particularly their new ones...

Idiots. Flocasts not flotrack got 8 mil. Wrestling, etc.

Change the headline.

learn to read wrote:

Idiots. Flocasts not flotrack got 8 mil. Wrestling, etc.

Change the headline.

You ask, you receive. They also own Milesplit.

is this the answer? wrote:

Dude have you been to a college track meet? Been to NCAAs? No one goes. Why in god's name would they want to pay some jerk $20 a month to watch it?

I don't go to track meets.

It takes time to get there and the meets are very long with only a few interesting races. It takes your whole day.

But if I can stay home and take 15-30 minutes to select and just watch the races that I want to watch, then there would be some value there.

Then I can do other stuff with my day and I have seen races that I otherwise wouldn't have gotten a chance to.

fao wrote:

bloodsport wrote:

Yes, the second they get a big loan they're going to charge less for their service.

It isn't a loan, it is an ownership stake, that is why they use the term capital.

Classic letsrun reading comprehension and people not knowing what they're talking about. See the checked box next to "equity", and the unchecked box next to "debt" - that means it's equity / ownership, and not a loan.

The term capital is used for both equity and debt. Right conclusion, incorrect logic.

Another FACEBOOK casualty wrote:

It looks like a buyout, that's all. My guess is the buyer will fold in the server code, liquidate assets, payoff debts, and shut down FT.

This does not look at all like a buyout. In a buyout, you don't issue new securities...nor do you shut down the company, that makes zero sense. As another poster mentioned, this looks like a classic Series A venture round. Maybe the founders got some of the $8M for themselves, or maybe it all went to the balance sheet so the company can use it to pay salaries & expenses while they continue to grow. Time will tell how this plays out.

Mark is selling because of youtube, NCAA TV, USATF TV, etc. A typical presale conversion pubically declared to the SEC. They call it flipping in real estate.

Investment bankers don't buy websites. The fact that you don't understand how that works is reason not 10,000,001 that no one is buying this site for a decent penny.

rojo wrote:

Guess that mean's they are unprofitable?

I couldn't get past this sentence; did it get better? Probably not :(

With the explosive growth of the NFL, NASCAR, and NCAA, incomes for sports TV companies have grown exponentially. Flowtrack, Runnerspace, and SEC TV have minimum six figure salaries for experienced web TV producers, announcers, and photographers. The sky is the limit.

Sour grapes?

More like : "no talent loses"

rojo wrote:

Guess that mean's they are unprofitable?

LetsRun.com - profitable from day 1!

-Rojo

Rojo, you're not profitable if you're not paying yourselves a salary. You two worked for years before the site made enough that you could leave your jobs.

I can remember being in the room with you at the 2000 Olympic Trials listening to you yell at someone on the phone because the Olympic Trials wouldn't recognize LRC as Weldon's sponsor. It was interesting, as I actually learned a little bit about marketing that day.

Profitability only counts if aren't donating your time to the business.

Over the years of visiting both sites, I've noticed that BroJos have rarely passed up the opportunity to snipe and snark about Flotrack. Flotrack has largely ignored letsrun, as far as I can see, and pursued their agenda of promoting the sport on the grassroots level. Manzano, BMart, and others have all benefited from Flotrack exposure when sponsors looked the other way. Brojos come off as haters, honestly...