<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>delecti</author><text>It&amp;#x27;s really weird how this article tries to frame the situation. It&amp;#x27;s almost like the startups feel entitled to the funding.&lt;p&gt;The point of funding should really be to enable faster growth than they might otherwise have been able to achieve, but if a business can&amp;#x27;t at least survive without huge influxes of investments then is it really a business that they should be investing in in the first place?</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Valley VCs Sit on Cash, Forcing Startups to Dial Back Ambition</title><url>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-09/more-venture-investors-are-sitting-on-the-sidelines</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>pritianka</author><text>I&amp;#x27;ve been in tech only 6 years and I am already bored of these cycles of VCs becoming frenetically exuberant followed by cautious times. Their advice to startups changes depending on what time it is. It&amp;#x27;s all so predictable yet people are surprised every time. Any entrepreneur building a business factors these in and approaches fund raising based on that knowledge. I don&amp;#x27;t even know the point of these articles any more.</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Valley VCs Sit on Cash, Forcing Startups to Dial Back Ambition</title><url>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-09/more-venture-investors-are-sitting-on-the-sidelines</url></story>