How the founders of Brex built a billion-dollar business in less than 2 years
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
Even if you have millions in the bank, the process of getting a card is long and tedious. It took me weeks, hours of phone calls, visits to the bank, and affected my personal credit. In the end a well-known card provider gave us a $5000 limit. We sometimes put that much on the card in a few days, and autopay is monthly, so someone had to manually monitor the card balance just to keep the card working.
The experience of being a small business that wants to use a credit card sucks. It's not even a little surprising to me that Brex is doing great.
I can see why they’d need a lot of capital but I fail to see the business model for actually generating (big) income.
Or maybe do the dirty work of acquiring lots and lots of small companies and then sell them back to a bank in one package?
You have a Brex card, you offer to pay for something: "Sure, I'll just Brex it..."
This is not meant to replace access to capital. It's meant to provide the same flexibility that a credit card gives to an employed individual. It allows small startups companies to simplify the way expenses are managed.
I have worked in a lot of startups where you will need to go and ask one of the founders to buy something that you need for work, because there's only one corporate debit card. My understanding is that Brex fixes this.
I always wanted to have an approval-flow for payments for company cards, would be a great addition.
I'd be fine issuing cards to everybody in the company as long as I can prevent the expense before it happens (and revoke credit card numbers when off-boarding employees).
my 0.02 cents
It definitely sounds like it's going to create bubbles. If companies help each other too much, then their success becomes increasingly artificial; all these companies become less efficient as a group and it's only a matter of time before companies outside of that cushy ecosystem catch up.
I think that eventually we'll get to a point when we collectively realize that the software development practices that we've adopted over the past decade are actually much less efficient than many other alternative approaches. For the past decade, the most efficient approaches and tools have been overlooked almost completely because they were developed outside of any VC ecosystems; so they didn't get any exposure or chance to prove themselves.
tools have been overlooked almost completely
Also even popular people like Guido van Rossum can't get enough funds to improve compilers of such an important language as Python [0]. And current patent system doesn't support developing of software tools because everything is already owned by some patent trolls. For instance, why do they still not use AI agents [1] in machine code optimization? I think, it is not a coincidence. Just read recent news about Chinese hacking the USA hardware. Along with Russians they just dumb you down.[0] "Dropbox pulls the plug on faster Python project", https://www.infoworld.com/article/3162800/open-source-tools/...
[1] "Simplifier AI", https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GSv89tiQmPDcnFEu4n4CqfaJcUJ...
Dropbox abandoned their incompatible python 2 jit compiler. Pypy remains available and there was really no point in having another around.
And Guido had nothing to do with that decision afaict.
Finally, the reason why they dropped it is absolutely correct. Python isn't meant to be used for performance critical work. Python is however fast enough for most usecases - especially with pypy, but definitely not all.
[0] https://spectrum.ieee.org/view-from-the-valley/computing/har...
Yes, you can have a substantial performance boost for python by rewriting it fully in c... But that's exactly like saying that c performance is substantially better than Python's.
Selling to start-ups is a great way to build these products.
Granting credit is a sophisticated market, is this just a case where they look for founders that have perfect credit and assume they’re probably OK? Do they even use standard CRA’s at all?
Like what’s the basic underwriting premise?
Subject of the film Gold. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_(2016_film)
They may have already reached their entire market for their existing business; the billion-dollar valuation only makes sense if they can plan to grow into other credit card markets.
That has literally never happened before to my knowledge. See online payments with Paypal, robo-investing with Betterment, crypto-currency with Coinbase, etc.
The more likely scenario would be other startups rising up to compete with them, but it seems like these guys have a decent head start with 100 million funding and what looks like a compelling product judging from their traction.
They think they can, and they’ll try, and it’ll be a hot mess, and Brex will be fine.
The APR would have to be sky-high and would start accruing the day after. There's a reason banks don't give a shitload of money to just anyone who can pay ~$1,000 form a corporation.
Are they going to write fraud detection from the ground-up too? Same with all of the customer support apps that allow reps to deal with issues?
This makes no sense to me. The risk here seems stratospheric unless "Visa Commercial" is already offering all of these, and Brex is just re-branding it.
Edit: Pagar.me would count as financial experience. I missed that sentence in the article.
There functionally is collateral. They monitor your bank account, you need min $50K in cash in it, and they only extend credit that's something like a quarter of your cash balance. It's a charge card, so you can't carry a balance.
It makes a lot of sense for cash-rich startups. The model doesn't work (in this form) for many small businesses.
That makes a lot more sense, but is that really a large addressable market? Is the idea to beat Amex with reporting?
It also competes directly with the expense market. If everybody can have a controlled company card, why do you need expense software?