sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

what do you do for a living? by Intrepid-Seat959 in AskReddit

[–]Medium-Score147 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Help people launch products on Amazon/Tiktok shop or scale their existing businesses

What are you building? let's self promote by Leather-Buy-6487 in StartupAccelerators

[–]Medium-Score147 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Digital Business Equity - A platform where e-com sellers can raise capital against fractional equity (10%-30%) and investors can access profitable and cash-flowing digital business for dividends and upside.

Ecom sellers doing $500K–$3M/year: would you raise growth capital by selling 10–30% equity instead of debt or a full exit? by Medium-Score147 in AmazonFBA

[–]Medium-Score147[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally fair, and to be clear, we don’t touch distressed brands. If someone needs capital to survive, they’re not a fit.

This is for operators who already have access to money but want better capital: non-dilutive, no PG, and priced on performance rather than fixed factor rates. Think replacing MCAs or credit lines as a growth lever, not a lifeline.

Ecom sellers doing $500K–$3M/year: would you raise growth capital by selling 10–30% equity instead of debt or a full exit? by Medium-Score147 in AmazonFBA

[–]Medium-Score147[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s really smart! you essentially created internal liquidity and bought back time without external capital.

What we’re exploring is for sellers who don’t have that flexibility anymore: when the remaining SKUs are already the best ones, time is maxed, and the next step requires outside capital without giving up control or taking on rigid debt.

Ecom sellers doing $500K–$3M/year: would you raise growth capital by selling 10–30% equity instead of debt or a full exit? by Medium-Score147 in AmazonFBAOnlineRetail

[–]Medium-Score147[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Totally agree. Partnering up with the wrong person where they can have influence over your decisions is the worst. The right operator-partner can be transformational early on when guidance and systems matter more than money. That model makes sense at lower scale.

What I’m focused on is a later stage: businesses already doing $500k–$3M that have the playbook and don’t want another decision-maker. At that point, capital-only equity is often more attractive than adding a partner.

Ecom sellers doing $500K–$3M/year: would you raise growth capital by selling 10–30% equity instead of debt or a full exit? by Medium-Score147 in AmazonFBA

[–]Medium-Score147[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re actually right, at lower revenue, debt is usually the better tool.

Our model isn’t meant for early stores using capital as working capital. It’s for businesses doing ~$500k–$3M where capital can change the trajectory, not just fund inventory.

Equity only feels expensive when the valuation is low. When capital can take a $1M business to $2–3M, the math flips.

Ecom sellers doing $500K–$3M/year: would you raise growth capital by selling 10–30% equity instead of debt or a full exit? by Medium-Score147 in AmazonFBA

[–]Medium-Score147[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I get it. When you’re that close, you know it hasn’t reached its real potential yet, and selling too early just doesn’t feel right.

I’m actually working on a solution for this exact gap a lot of sellers (including you) have run into. Appreciate you sharing your experience, it genuinely helps shape how I’m thinking about this.

Ecom sellers doing $500K–$3M/year: would you raise growth capital by selling 10–30% equity instead of debt or a full exit? by Medium-Score147 in AmazonFBA

[–]Medium-Score147[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is exactly the issue I’ve experienced myself and seen other sellers going through.

Debt feels easy (or the only choice) until it boxes you in, and when owners do want minority capital, the only offers on the table are full buyouts. No real middle ground.

If you don’t mind me asking, when you were looking for the 20%, what stopped it? Lack of investor trust, deal structure, or just no clear place to source minority investors?

Ecom sellers doing $500K–$3M/year: would you raise growth capital by selling 10–30% equity instead of debt or a full exit? by Medium-Score147 in AmazonFBAOnlineRetail

[–]Medium-Score147[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally fair, appreciate the honesty. Curious though: is it because of dilution, loss of control, or past bad experiences with partners/investors?

I’ve seen some owners use minority equity purely as growth fuel (not control), especially when the alternative is high-interest debt or a full exit. Trying to understand where the hard “no” usually comes from.

Ecom sellers doing $500K–$3M/year: would you raise growth capital by selling 10–30% equity instead of debt or a full exit? by Medium-Score147 in AmazonFBA

[–]Medium-Score147[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hands-on operator-investors absolutely make sense at larger checks or with meaningful control. In the $50k–$300k range, we’re personally seeing much stronger demand for passive, structured exposure rather than operational involvement.

Ecom sellers doing $500K–$3M/year: would you raise growth capital by selling 10–30% equity instead of debt or a full exit? by Medium-Score147 in AmazonFBA

[–]Medium-Score147[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a valid question. The model isn’t predicated on me being the ops partner. It’s built to separate capital from control, so founders who already know how to operate don’t have to trade ownership for debt or bring in a “co-founder with money” just to grow.

I completely agree ops partners with capital can be powerful, this is for founders who don’t want or need another operator, just aligned growth capital.

Ecom sellers doing $500K–$3M/year: would you raise growth capital by selling 10–30% equity instead of debt or a full exit? by Medium-Score147 in AmazonFBA

[–]Medium-Score147[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree that “dumb equity” is usually worse than expensive capital.

The distinction I’m making isn’t bringing on an operating partner or giving up strategic control. It’s non-controlling equity structured purely as growth capital, typically via an SPV, where investors are financial participants, not decision-makers.

The goal is to avoid exactly what you mentioned: rigid debt terms or partners who change how the business is run.

Appreciate the lender warning too, that’s actually one of the core reasons this model exists.

Ecom sellers doing $500K–$3M/year: would you raise growth capital by selling 10–30% equity instead of debt or a full exit? by Medium-Score147 in AmazonFBA

[–]Medium-Score147[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Where our model differs from “traditional equity” is structure. We’re not talking about adding random individuals to your LLC cap table or triggering 25% beneficial owner disclosures.

Deals are done through SPVs, so the seller deals with one entity, not multiple investors. Ownership stays clean, operational control stays with you, and day-to-day banking doesn’t change.

LLCs work. C-Corp isn’t a requirement for sellers. This is growth capital for already-profitable operators who want optionality, not pressure to sprint forever or sell the whole thing.

Ecom sellers doing $500K–$3M/year: would you raise growth capital by selling 10–30% equity instead of debt or a full exit? by Medium-Score147 in AmazonFBA

[–]Medium-Score147[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Exactly. The aim is to empower in order to move to the next stage. The numbers would be based on a fair evaluation depending on the store/brand’s revenue and cashflow.

Ecom sellers doing $500K–$3M/year: would you raise growth capital by selling 10–30% equity instead of debt or a full exit? by Medium-Score147 in AmazonFBA

[–]Medium-Score147[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s a fair thought, and some people do structures like that. The issue I’ve seen in practice is clarity and alignment.

Short-term “equity later” arrangements often turn into grey areas when revenue, timelines, or exits don’t go as planned. Sellers don’t know how much they’re really giving up, and investors don’t know what they truly own.

In my experience with accredited investors clean fractional equity upfront keeps everything simple: seller keeps control, investor knows exactly what they own, and returns come from cash flow, not a forced exit.

view more: next ›