That doesn't sound like the right amount of inflation. Maybe you mean $190M then or ~$435M now?
2% compounded for 20 years is about 50%. In fact, that seems to be very close to the correct amount.
Should I take this opportunity to point out that pet.com's $435 million is still a paltry sum compared to WeWork's $14.2 billion in capital, or has that larger point been rendered moot by my lack of common sense?
Here's an article listing some of the failures from the late 90s:
https://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2012/06/stock-crash-the-...
Looks like eToys was close to $8B valuation around the time of its IPO. Although that doesn't mean they raised anywhere near that.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB927219879724795777
So, WeWork may have gotten 100x more investment, but its valuation is more like double or less.
They raised $110.5 million in private capital and $82.5 million at IPO [0].
WeWork has raised $14.2 billion in capital to date[1].
In other words, pets.com only raised a mere 1% of the current total that WeWork has raised.
If pets.com was the poster child for the dot com debacles then this new era of irrational startup exuberance exemplified by WeWork is another beast entirely.
[0] https://www.marketwatch.com/story/sock-puppet-kills-petscom [1] https://craft.co/wework/funding-rounds