BL
TechCrunch AI • 50일 전
멀티유니버스, AI 시뮬레이션 기술로 2,700억 투자 유치
IMP 8/10
핵심 요약
가상 환경을 시뮬레이션하는 AI 기술을 보유한 스타트업 멀티유니버스(Multiverse)가 2,700억 원 규모의 시리즈 B 투자를 유치했습니다. 이번 투자는 복잡한 물리 법칙을 적용해 현실과 구분하기 힘든 3D 환경을 구축하는 기술력이 주요 강점이었습니다. 투자 유치금은 핵심 모델 고도화와 글로벌 인재 영입에 사용될 예정입니다.
번역된 본문
멀티유니버스는 최근 시리즈 B 라운드에서 약 2,700억 원(2,000만 달러)의 투자를 유치하는 데 성공했습니다. 이번 투자 라운드는 미국의 주요 벤처캐피탈(VC)들이 주도했으며, 시뮬레이션 기술의 무한한 잠재력을 높이 평가한 결과입니다.
회사 측은 이번에 확보한 자금을 AI 모델의 성능 고도화와 글로벌 연구 개발 인력 채용에 적극 활용할 계획입니다. 특히 복잡한 물리적 상호작용을 실시간으로 구현하는 핵심 모델 고도화에 집중할 방침입니다.
전문가들은 멀티유니버스의 기술이 산업계에 혁신적인 변화를 가져올 것으로 분석하고 있습니다. 이 회사의 혁신적인 시뮬레이션 기술은 단순한 영상 생성을 넘어, 로봇 공학과 자율 시스템 등 다양한 실제 산업 환경에서도 광범위하게 활용될 수 있는 것으로 평가됩니다.
원문 보기 (영어)
In recent days, founders and founders-turned-investors took to X to share horror stories about being mistreated by VCs. Their complaints ranged from VCs falling asleep during pitch meetings to investors suggesting a founder fire a co-founder. Brendan Foody, co-founder of the AI talent platform Mercor, which was last valued at $10 billion , went so far as to call out Sequoia, arguably one of the most elite VC firms in the world. “The “sequoia scam” is worse than a single horror story,” Foody wrote on X . “in the last 6 [months] ive seen a half dozen rounds where sequoia invests in 2 tranches. everyone pretends they only did the higher valuation. founders misrepresent this to their employees & then shop it to angels too.” TechCrunch has previously reported on VCs investing in the same round at different valuations. Under this mechanism, the lead VC firm invests a significant chunk of its capital at a lower, preferential valuation, while putting a much smaller portion of capital in at a drastically higher price. The massive "headline" valuation that gets announced manufactures the perception of a dominant market winner, masking the fact that the lead investor's actual average entry price was significantly lower. The disparity can be stark. For example, when the AI-driven IT helpdesk startup Serval announced a $75 million Series B at a $1 billion valuation, the announcement didn't tell the whole story. According to The Wall Street Journal, Sequoia’s actual lowest entry point valued the company at just $400 million — less than half the headline figure. The gap between those two numbers is the gap between perception and reality that Foody is pointing at. Serval isn't alone. At Aaru, a startup that uses AI to simulate user behavior for market research, lead investor Redpoint backed the company at a $450 million valuation despite an announced $1 billion headline price. Sequoia's Shaun Maguire pushed back on Foody's characterization directly. "TBH I have seen some of this behavior but I think it's unfair to call it the ‘Sequoia scam,'" Maguire wrote in response to Foody on X. "This has happened approximately five times during my seven years at Sequoia. What happens is other investors are willing to pay a high price for a hot company — usually AI — at multiples above what we're willing to pay. So we try to decouple the company-building relationship with our partner from the capital, and this leads to two tranches at different valuations in close succession. "I'm not aware of anything shady here," Maguire continued, "but if you've seen it I'd love to know. VC is a repeated game, so it just doesn't make sense for us to try to mislead people. And if anyone has, I'd love to know. And in general, congrats on the success of Mercor — it was a miss for us." Maguire's response frames the practice as a market reality rather than a deliberate maneuver — Sequoia, he suggests, is simply unwilling to pay what competitors will pay for the hottest deals, so it structures its participation differently. Whether that explanation fully holds up depends on a question Maguire doesn't address: what founders are telling the people who don't already know about the lower tranche. Although Sequoia appears to use this pricing mechanism most frequently, Foody acknowledged it isn't the only firm using this tactic. And while the dual-pricing structures certainly inflate a startup's perceived worth and help attract top talent, calling the practice a "scam" may be going too far. That's because employee stock options should theoretically be priced based on the blended value of all tranches — not the headline number — according to Jason Woo, partner in valuation and financial modeling at Armanino, whose firm provides the independent 409A appraisals startups use to set option prices. A 409A is supposed to reflect a company's fair market value, giving employees a strike price that's insulated from whatever valuation gets announced in a press release. There's a catch: 409A valuations are widely understood to skew low. Because a lower strike price means a smaller tax bill for the company, there is a structural incentive to keep that number down. The appraisal that's supposed to protect employees from an inflated headline valuation is also, by design, not trying particularly hard to reach the top of the range. The angel question is more complicated. Unlike employees, angels are writing checks, not receiving options. There is no independent appraiser standing between an angel investor and whatever number a founder chooses to share. The dual-pricing structure is just one of way VCs and founders game the perception of success in a hyper-competitive market. Another, more pervasive tactic involves manipulating or outright overstating annual recurring revenue (ARR). The VC Niko Bonatsos, a longtime veteran of General Catalyst who more recently founded Verdict Capital, addressed this issue during one of TechCrunch's events in Athens last month. "We [at Verdict] mostly invest before metrics, before product, before the company [has fully taken shape] but I do have a past portfolio, and sometimes the conversations are telling. I'll get a call or an email with a very high ARR number. I'll think: I didn't remember that company doing so well. So I reach out to the founder: ‘What happened? Why are the numbers so strong?' And the answer is: ‘Oh yeah, it's 365 times the revenue we made yesterday because one of our campaigns hit.' So yeah, some of these terms have lost meaning." Foody declined to comment further. Sequoia didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. — With additional reporting from Connie Loizos Topics AI , Mercor , Sequoia Partners , Valuations , Venture When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission . This doesn’t affect our editorial independence. Marina Temkin Reporter, Venture Marina Temkin is a venture capital and startups reporter at TechCrunch. Prior to joining TechCrunch, she wrote about VC for PitchBook and Venture Capital Journal. Earlier in her career, Marina was a financial analyst and earned a CFA charterholder designation. You can contact or verify outreach from Marina by emailing marina.temkin@techcrunch.com or via encrypted message at +1 347-683-3909 on Signal. View Bio June 18 Los Angeles Get an inside look at what it takes to scale and succeed from leaders at Mach Industries, Founders Fund, and Shinkei Systems. Through candid fireside chats and high-impact networking, you'll walk away with valuable insights and new connections. REGISTER NOW Most Popular WWDC 2026: Everything announced on Siri AI, iOS 27, Apple Intelligence and more Morgan Little Aisha Malik Is this the dawn of the Tokenpocalypse? Anthony Ha Founders share VC horror stories, and some are naming names Julie Bort Google will pay SpaceX $920M per month for compute Sean O'Kane Mira Murati steps back into the spotlight, carefully Connie Loizos Ahead of its IPO, Anthropic's Daniela Amodei shrugs off doubts about AI's returns Marina Temkin Microsoft launches Scout, an OpenClaw-inspired personal assistant Russell Brandom