Quizzes are confusing and sometimes ask questions that were not covered in the module

Good overview from over all investor presepctive, with easy and simplified formula

First 2 weeks where good, lot of learning, last 2 weeks really confusing.

Course started losing clarity beginning with the second professor.

Some outside research is needed, but it is a good course overall.

Too quick, they brush over some key details imo. Good overall

One of the best and well taught course on the subject.

Very Good Course to understand Valuation Methods

Curso muito interessante e bastante amplo.

VC method could have been better

Great course for Entrepreneur

Though tough, made it done.

Very good, indeed!

Excellent course

Really good!

It is one thing to lecture and another thing to teach. David's lectures left a number of gaps meaning I had to struggles to connect up all the pieces of information. The content covered overall was great and the lighting and self tan on the lecturers was very nice. But the assessments were poorly structured and frustratingly so. For example, one four-question assessment asked to calculate terminal value when they only taught this in the subsequent module. So I went crazy trying to figure out where I missed this in the lectures and ultimately failed the test (need 80% to pass). But you can retake the test right? Yes, after you get locked out for precisely 24hr. And once you try tests a second time and pass, only your initial fail scores are tallied up by the end of the course to count towards your final score. Anyway, I got through it but perhaps the course by Yonsei University would be better.

The topics covered are very interesting and useful, but the course has some major flaws: 1) the slides cannot be downloaded, and the "Kale and Kombucha" spreadsheet is nowhere to be found (I have tried to ask for it but got no answer). 2) wrong answers are not corrected nor explained at all, so I got stuck at times with no clue on how to get the answers right. This is not a good teaching practice. Without the help of ChatGPT I would have been unable to pass at least a couple of tests. Some reference to further studying material would also a very useful addition to the course.

Great course, well delivered. I would have preferred more reading material to fill the blanks between practical and theoretical. That said, I wouldn't say the course was strictly academic, it was in fact very practical. Just would have liked some real life challenges to be included, and not just the simplest ones. Anyone who takes this course will come out of it having a string understanding of VC. And if those ones are willing to do extra work around the content, you'll benefit greatly. I would have liked to see more information on unforeseen failures on a fundamentals level.

As half of the reviews state, the first two weeks are very good, while the third and fourth weeks are weak. Personal suggestions for people approaching the topic: if your knowledge of finance is zero, I would consider another course because this one does not give you the basic information to understand the topic properly.

Very interesting course, especially the two first weeks, but in Week 3 we missed a lot of information (correction of exercise, formulas incorrect, formulas missing from the course to take the quizzes...)

Overall good, although the first two weeks are a bit too basic in content. Later on, the course gets better. It could improve by giving examples of solutions to the proposed exercises.

The course was overall interesting. VC investor model needs to be more elaborate with supporting excel sheets for better understanding of complex calculations.

Unfortunately, the second professor did not teach the mathematical formulas and I believe there were some errors in the questions on the week 3 test.

The 1st part of the course it's very clear, the week 3 and week 4 the content it's good but there's no relation with some questions in the quiz.

Weeks 3-4 were difficult to follow along. No solutions were provided for the homework. More work in excel would have been preferred.