# TechCrunch examines Pinterest’s new funding and valuation [Canonical reading](https://escapemeridian.com/readings/techcrunch-examines-pinterest-s-new-funding-and-valuation-04579a98) TechCrunch’s Alex Wilhelm wrote on June 9, 2017, that Pinterest had raised new money from private investors. He describes the round as small relative to the company’s valuation, earlier funding and revenue, and explores why Pinterest may have taken the money. The article compares reported revenue figures and forecasts with the company’s valuation to discuss its declining revenue multiple, a measure of valuation relative to revenue. Wilhelm argues that this multiple was still high, while suggesting that further growth could help Pinterest make its case to public-market investors. The revenue figures for 2017 are forecasts reported by the article, not established results. The article offers possible explanations for the funding, including investor willingness to buy shares and a delay to a potential public offering, but does not establish Pinterest’s reason. Headline and summary by Escape Meridian, prepared by Luna from the attributed source. A source check is not independent confirmation of the source’s claims. ## Original source TechCrunch · Article Original source date: Jun 9, 2017 (2017-06-09). Date basis: Date from the publisher’s archive: its article address or archive listing. Added to Escape Meridian: 2026-10-29T00:13:14.525Z. First observed: 2026-10-28T07:07:52.845Z. Retrieved: 2026-10-28T07:09:51.462Z. - [Unpacking Pinterest's $150M Series Whatever](https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/09/unpacking-pinterests-150m-series-whatever/) ## Limits Text as retrieved on October 28, 2026; originally published June 9, 2017. The article presents 2017 revenue figures as targets and possibilities attributed to sources; it does not establish the eventual revenue result. The article offers possible reasons for the funding but does not establish Pinterest’s motive. ## Open question If Snap’s declines continue, at what point could its weakness harm Pinterest’s path to the public markets? ## Source-stated TechCrunch reports that Pinterest raised $150 million from private investors. > Pinterest raised $150 million from private investors this week. - [Supporting source](https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/09/unpacking-pinterests-150m-series-whatever/) ## Source-stated The article says Pinterest’s valuation increased while its per-share price remained at the prior round’s level, citing reports and Bloomberg. > Reports indicate that Pinterest’s $150 million was raised at its preceding per-share price. - [Supporting source](https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/09/unpacking-pinterests-150m-series-whatever/) ## Source-stated The article reports that Recode described Pinterest’s 2017 revenue as a target above $500 million, with some sources anticipating as much as $600 million. > Pinterest \[…\] is targeting more than $500 million in revenue in 2017, according to multiple sources familiar with the company’s plans. Some believe the company could generate as much as $600 million this year. - [Supporting source](https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/09/unpacking-pinterests-150m-series-whatever/) ## Escape Meridian interpretation Escape Meridian reads the article as presenting future revenue growth as a possible support for Pinterest’s case to public-market investors, not as a guaranteed outcome. > if the firm can grow like hell all year, and put up, say, a strong Q1 2018, it may have the story it needs for a flat-ish IPO. - [Supporting source](https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/09/unpacking-pinterests-150m-series-whatever/) ## Source and contributor context TechCrunch · Publisher The publisher is identified here. No individual author has been inferred. ## Source media Media retrieval status: unchecked. ## Terms and references Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement. ## Editorial provenance Version 1. Publication ID: 48554ac7-e677-45f6-ca12-58cf1a31838a. Prepared by openai/gpt-6-luna; grounding review by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5. Source check: passed by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 on 2026-10-29T00:11:55.933Z. This checks fidelity to the source, not whether its claims are independently true. Editorial selection: accept; reasons: bridge\_admitted\_by\_model. Observation: ac47db2217827b84788d966c7073813fe6d41b56b0fcf0aab5ec2319ac647a14. Source text hash: 1d662bc7737e93df9fad52cb2e91be888dc822721e5365abe2cee74ac09d891d. ## Revision and source-check history ### Version 1 — 2026-10-29T00:13:14.525Z TechCrunch’s Alex Wilhelm wrote on June 9, 2017, that Pinterest had raised new money from private investors. He describes the round as small relative to the company’s valuation, earlier funding and revenue, and explores why Pinterest may have taken the money. The article compares reported revenue figures and forecasts with the company’s valuation to discuss its declining revenue multiple, a measure of valuation relative to revenue. Wilhelm argues that this multiple was still high, while suggesting that further growth could help Pinterest make its case to public-market investors. The revenue figures for 2017 are forecasts reported by the article, not established results. The article offers possible explanations for the funding, including investor willingness to buy shares and a delay to a potential public offering, but does not establish Pinterest’s reason. ## Original source TechCrunch · Article Original source date: Jun 9, 2017 (2017-06-09). Date basis: Date from the publisher’s archive: its article address or archive listing. Added to Escape Meridian: 2026-10-29T00:13:14.525Z. First observed: 2026-10-28T07:07:52.845Z. Retrieved: 2026-10-28T07:09:51.462Z. - [Unpacking Pinterest's $150M Series Whatever](https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/09/unpacking-pinterests-150m-series-whatever/) ## Limits Text as retrieved on October 28, 2026; originally published June 9, 2017. The article presents 2017 revenue figures as targets and possibilities attributed to sources; it does not establish the eventual revenue result. The article offers possible reasons for the funding but does not establish Pinterest’s motive. ## Open question If Snap’s declines continue, at what point could its weakness harm Pinterest’s path to the public markets? ## Source-stated TechCrunch reports that Pinterest raised $150 million from private investors. > Pinterest raised $150 million from private investors this week. - [Supporting source](https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/09/unpacking-pinterests-150m-series-whatever/) ## Source-stated The article says Pinterest’s valuation increased while its per-share price remained at the prior round’s level, citing reports and Bloomberg. > Reports indicate that Pinterest’s $150 million was raised at its preceding per-share price. - [Supporting source](https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/09/unpacking-pinterests-150m-series-whatever/) ## Source-stated The article reports that Recode described Pinterest’s 2017 revenue as a target above $500 million, with some sources anticipating as much as $600 million. > Pinterest \[…\] is targeting more than $500 million in revenue in 2017, according to multiple sources familiar with the company’s plans. Some believe the company could generate as much as $600 million this year. - [Supporting source](https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/09/unpacking-pinterests-150m-series-whatever/) ## Escape Meridian interpretation Escape Meridian reads the article as presenting future revenue growth as a possible support for Pinterest’s case to public-market investors, not as a guaranteed outcome. > if the firm can grow like hell all year, and put up, say, a strong Q1 2018, it may have the story it needs for a flat-ish IPO. - [Supporting source](https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/09/unpacking-pinterests-150m-series-whatever/) ## Source and contributor context TechCrunch · Publisher The publisher is identified here. No individual author has been inferred. ## Source media Media retrieval status: unchecked. ## Terms and references Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement. ## Editorial provenance Version 1. Publication ID: 48554ac7-e677-45f6-ca12-58cf1a31838a. Prepared by openai/gpt-6-luna; grounding review by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5. Source check: passed by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 on 2026-10-29T00:11:55.933Z. This checks fidelity to the source, not whether its claims are independently true. Editorial selection: accept; reasons: bridge\_admitted\_by\_model. Observation: ac47db2217827b84788d966c7073813fe6d41b56b0fcf0aab5ec2319ac647a14. Source text hash: 1d662bc7737e93df9fad52cb2e91be888dc822721e5365abe2cee74ac09d891d. ### passed — 2026-10-29T00:11:55.933Z — anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 Publication: 48554ac7-e677-45f6-ca12-58cf1a31838a attribution — pass: The reading correctly attributes the analysis to TechCrunch's Alex Wilhelm, who is named as the author on the page. It attributes the Bloomberg and Recode figures to those outlets as the article cites them. > Alex Wilhelm was a senior reporter for TechCrunch covering the markets, venture capital and startups. summary — pass: The title, summary and question faithfully reflect the article. It identifies the actor and explains the central term, revenue multiple, in plain language. It preserves the author's view that the multiple is still high but falling, and keeps the possible reasons for the funding as hypotheses. The question adapts the author's own closing homework question rather than making a leading claim. > Homework: If Snap’s declines continue, at what point does its weakness harm Pinterest’s own path to the public markets? date — pass: The June 9, 2017 date matches originalPublished at day precision. The dateModified value is the same day. The 2017 revenue figures are presented as forecasts, not outcomes. The Most Popular sidebar lists later stories, but the reading neither uses nor relies on them. The evidence is a publisher page, so no archive disclosure is needed. support — pass: Each claim is grounded in the source text: the $150M raise, the per-share price, the Recode revenue target, and the labeled interpretation about growth supporting an IPO case. The statement that the multiple was still high is directly supported. The reading adds no unsupported benefits or costs. > That is still high, but it is getting back to Earth. media — pass: No media was selected and no verified candidates were supplied, so there is no media identity or relevance issue. ## Recorded references Explicit citations in public readings and public file attachments to this reading. Shared topics are not citations. Other artifact types need an explicit reference adapter. No public references recorded here yet. [Reference data (JSON)](/readings/04579a98dfaf01320b832185fe5af236ce89d6739197f0130e1de98bdaee87cc/references.json) ## Corrections and challenges [Send a correction or an opposing source](https://escapemeridian.com/corrections/) [JSON record](https://escapemeridian.com/readings/techcrunch-examines-pinterest-s-new-funding-and-valuation-04579a98.json)