Stripe is a fully featured product and platform now with so many customers: it's the go-to payment provider for pretty much every startup. Do they really need this money? If so, that's scary. I want my payment provider to have a rock solid business model, not still burning VC cash.

I would expect that at this stage Stripe ought to be pulling away from VC money, as their profits hopefully increase. There are, of course, valid reasons to take VC money at a late stage - fuelling expansion is the main reason. But does Stripe really need the money to expand? I would hope that they could support their expansion themselves.

Normally I wouldn't care much, such as when Uber raised a bunch of money recently, but Stripe is different because they're so central to my business. I really need them to be rock solid. It would be a huge pain if I had to switch payment providers, especially with all of the subscription logic that Stripe provides.

Stripe CEO here: this story is false. We've never even contemplated raising such a vast amount of money.

Direct as they say from the horse's mouth. I would not expect you to elaborate. However, thanks for making such a kick ass product!

Thanks very much for using it! (Feedback always welcome: [email protected].)

Are you guys coming to New Zealand? I need a payment platform for a service I want to launch.

^ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4633971

I've been watching for updates for almost 3 years :( Gave me so much hope. There are a few local startups that have tried to replicate Stripe, but their customer service is absolutely atrocious.

According to Crunchbase you've already raised $190 million.

https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/stripe

I guess that's just shy of a "vast amount"? What planet are you guys on? It's insulting.

There is a difference between $190MM over five rounds in five years vs. one round of $500MM.

I roughly agree with your sentiments. I am currently a Stripe customer, but if I wasn't this funding would make me think twice about doing biz with them. That sort of money creates all sorts of perverse incentives. For these reasons, we looked at Zenefits, and ended up going with the someone else. People there just have not perspective and no real reason to place value on the customer when they have money to burn.

The counter-example is Github. They took $100MM from AH which they did not need. Fortunately, from the customer's perspective the product has not suffered. That being said, they have had some internal management issues that I suspect they would not have had if they didn't have money to burn.

curious who you chose over Zenefits? having used other alternatives, I sing the praises of Zenefits since we've started using them.

They might be trying to roll some new stuff out. I don't know about Stripe's financial internals, but they could have stable financials, but a major project in mind and need cash to run for it. VC money's probably way easier to get than a $500 million bank loan for them.

Last I talked to someone at Stripe, my impression is that they were still relatively small in terms of staff (I think someone said 100 in total across the world?).

Financial companies often need working capital that's independent of investment in new products. For example, if Stripe wants to have an offering that pays Party A today, but collects that money from Party B tomorrow, they need working capital for that, but that capital is at much lower risk and gets financed with very different terms (often debt rather than equity).

If we've learned anything in the past 10 years hasn't it been not to irrevocably build dependency on any 3rd party service or API?

Maybe they need the capital to build new products.

I wonder what they need that much money for. Their product is pretty solid and I assume they are making a profit. Is it for marketing purpose?

See above. PC calls bull on this story.

I enjoyed working with Stripe, they greatly simplified the whole process. However we've had to move back to a traditional gateway due to the 7-day rolling bank deposits in Australia. Taking 6 days of cash-flow out of the business just isn't good enough.