Good observation of it but yes, missing the underlying intention of the article a bit (my fault not yours). Venture investors invest in future potential, not present value; business investors invest in present value with future possibility. That is, technically, we'd have to arrive at a higher valuation of a startup, in such a case, but a business (a new business) wouldn't necessarily consider this unreasonable... Honestly, I didn't think through the math nor want to get into clarifying investor expectations, startups vs. businesses, risk, etc. so much as it makes for too long an article and loses focus.

Indeed though, my neglecting all that raises more questions than having all the answers.

Point of the article was not the precision in the math but rather, the fact that overwhelmingly most founders still have no idea how to figure this stuff out.

A "startup" is going to weigh much heavier (and better) on the exit potential and opportunity, competition, etc. than I implied... if it's worth funding.

[I may play with the math to make it more realistic AND clear... if I can manage a time to edit the article :) ]