Sign in / up

back to article Storage startups: Hey VCs, it's not just the size, it's the frequency

The funding pattern for storage startups has radically changed as newer young companies in hotly contested marts race for growth. The chart shows the various funding events we have recorded for 32 individual storage startups. These may be declared VC funding rounds or strategic investments. The units are millions of dollars, …

COMMENTS

Post your comment
House rules Send corrections
Add to 'My topics' unstar *
  1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

    The storage wars are over. Server SANs won. Everything else is just jockeying for position. Arrays will begin their gradual decline. It'll take 25 years for them to fully evaporate down to their concentrated remainder, but they'll follow mainframes as a zombie tech.

    In the meantime and between time, it's all about who can provide the best server SAN. After that comes rolling in other features to help migrate people to server SANs. (Datacore, anyone?) Then maybe arrays to deal with niches or as a temporary point solution.

    *shrug*

    Software defined network is the new battleground, and with it, the first real skirmishes that will mark the beginning of the software defined infrastructure wars.

    0 3 Reply
  2. M Debelic

    Target selling price

    Perhaps Data Domain and Isilon set the benchmark for a target selling price (2-2.5B$) for a successful startup storage company. Hence that may be the return VC's are looking for. It's a risk, but that's part of their job.

    0 0 Reply
  3. marcfarley

    That sound you hear is big mergers sucking the air out of the industry

    VCs fail all the time, that's why they go in together with others and place their bets and they make lots of bets on different companies with different technologies in sectors they hope will break through. The big winners more than cover the biggest losers. If that ever changes then we are probably all screwed.

    The biggest thing that has changed is the consolidation in the industry. There are fewer potential acquiring companies, which means there are fewer big time exit paths. For me, that's the scariest thing about a potential EMC/ HP(Enterprise) merger. Its hard enough already trying to pick promising startups to work for when there are numerous acquirers. Less competition to acquire the next big thing means that the next big thing has to prove itself over a longer period of time and show much more market penetration - hence the longer gestation period for the winners.. That will probably produce fewer, but much larger, IPOs too.

    2 0 Reply

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

Forgotten password ?

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like