Diligence memo · auto-generated · as of July 2, 2026

Future Bliss Films LLC

Future Bliss Films LLC looks fair against its niche peers and is dormant on financing cadence.

DeprioritizeFinancing has gone silent well past the sector's normal cadence — treat as inactive until outside confirmation of a live operation.

Businessfiled

Future Bliss Films LLC operates in Other, based in NEW YORK.

Sector still resolves to a broad 'Other' bucket, so operating comparables below are weaker than for a tightly-classified peer.

No verified homepage on file yet — operating evidence is limited to the public record.

Capital & rounds (filed)filed

Future Bliss Films LLC has raised $300K in disclosed capital across 1 recorded round, aggregated from public filings. Its latest round is modeled as Pre-Seed (a round under $1.0M).

Largest single filing: $300K on 2010-03-08.

Most recent recorded round closed around 2010-03-08.

Valuation (modeled)modeled

Provath models Future Bliss Films LLC at approximately $6.9M (range $200K–$79M). This is an algorithmic estimate from round sizes and same-niche peers — not a quoted or reported figure.

Read: Fair. Modeled value is 0.92× the median modeled value of Pre-Seed Other companies in 2010–2012 (1459 peers) — value vs value, same stage and era. Within the normal band (92% of peer median) for its niche.

Financing rhythm & timingmixed

Last raise 16.3 yr ago; this sector typically re-raises about every 11 months.

Only one round on record and long silent — often defunct, acquired, or gone quiet.

Comparablesmixed

Capital scale ranks ahead of 15% of Other peers (25015 compared).

Modeled value ranks above 32% of those peers.

Closest niche peers: Crown Rock Lenders, LLC, Lucas Venture Group V, LLC, Attitude Drinks Inc., Direct 2 Manufacturer, LLC, Suter Joshua Scott.

Peoplefiled

1 named person on file across officers, directors and signatories.

Risks & flagsmixed

Financing has been silent well beyond sector cadence — possibly defunct, acquired, or paused.

Broad sector classification weakens peer comparison.

No clearly named CEO/founder/principal in the surfaced records — key-person evidence is thin.