Why we turned down $200,000

Integrity is expensive. Selling out costs more.

We just had our first real test of integrity as a company. It cost us $200,000.

An investor committed funding to Subvert. Then, they began to push for concessions. They wanted us to restructure our democratic governance model to give investors permanent board seats - not subject to community election or accountability.

We said no.

What happened

When we began fundraising for Subvert, we were clear about our vision from day one: this platform would be collectively owned and democratically governed by its community.

This particular investor seemed aligned with our mission initially. But as we moved toward finalizing the investment, they pushed for changes that we were not comfortable with.

In our structure, all board members are elected to serve and be accountable to the co-op’s members. Creating a permanent investor board seat is not a precedent we are willing to set now.

So we walked away.

Why this matters

This wasn't just about one investor or one board seat. This was our first test. This was about whether we would stay true to the foundational principle that makes Subvert different: that the people who use and create on the platform should control it.

The moment we create a structure where investors can overrule the community's will, we will have failed.

What this means for Subvert

Now, our fundraising has concluded. Our runway is now shorter than expected. We're sitting at $650k investment in the bank instead of the $850k we planned for and publicly communicated. The pressure is up, but our backs aren't against the wall.

More importantly, this experience has reinforced our commitment to democratic governance as a non-negotiable principle. Democratic governance isn't something to work around. It's our core strength.

The cost of integrity

This process was a reminder that maintaining integrity can be expensive. But compromising on our core values would have cost us more.

Every company will face some moment like this. A moment of pressure to compromise. A moment where it’s easier to accept the deal that doesn't feel quite right. A moment where it's convenient to not share details.

This is why platforms that start with good intentions end up disappointing their communities. Not because the founders are bad people, but because they make incremental compromises that seem reasonable in isolation but add up to abandoning their original mission, or betraying their community.

This is what happened to Bandcamp and why it ended up being sold twice without community knowledge or input.

So, we want to take this moment and use it to not only publicly share the details of our funding, but to reiterate what we are building and the beliefs we will not compromise on.

Here is our uncompromised vision:

Democratic Community Control: We are a community that is capable of governing ourselves

True collective ownership: We create value for platforms. It's time for us to own and control what already belongs to us

Financial transparency: We believe in being open about our funding, expenses, and financial decisions

This means that when we say "collectively-owned" and "collectively-controlled" we mean it. Our beliefs have to stay true even when those decisions may be hard, uncomfortable, or expensive.

Full transparency: Our current funding

We're aware that the wrong kind of investment can undermine everything we're working toward. But this doesn’t mean investment is the enemy. Platforms are expensive to build, and an under-funded Subvert doesn't serve anyone. We also want to avoid precarity and burnout for the workers in our co-op.

That’s why we’ve been grateful to have several community members step forward to financially invest in our full uncompromised cooperative vision. In doing so, we're making history as one of the only cooperative platforms to raise a proper funding round - while doing it on our own terms.

Here's where we stand:

Total Investment: $650,000

Our Investors:

• Garry Elevator (John Garry) Supporter-Member, Brooklyn - $600,000
• Harry Lachenmeyer, Supporter-Member, London - $5,000
• Jason Prado, Supporter-Membe, San Francisco - $15,000
• w0rmw00d, Artist-Member, Oakland- $10,000
• Artist-Member, Berlin - $20,000

And now that we have elected board members, any future funding will be approved by our democratic board representing artists, labels, supporters, and workers.

Investment Structure: Want to see our documents and how investment was structured and the terms that were used? Click here to view.

Budget Breakdown: Take a look at our budget detailing how funds are allocated. Click here to view our budgeted use of funds.

Funding FAQ: If you have any questions about the terms or structure of our fundraising, we have added details to a funding FAQ here.

What's next? The platform. Next week we'll announce the start of the process for artists to begin onboarding and creating their artist pages.

A collectively-owned Bandcamp successor is on the horizon.

Sincerely Ours,