10 ms·

On the other hand, what you describe doesn't sound like a start up from the high-growth/external investment required point of view. Sure startup is a sexier wa

by zdkl 10y ago

On the other hand, what you describe doesn't sound like a start up from the high-growth/external investment required point of view. Sure startup is a sexier way to describe a young, small business but semantics aside, this feels like "traditional" business looking for glamour. Of which I am equally guilty, donnt take this as criticism.

apatters 10y ago
If I was looking for glamour I would have raised money, started the type of business described in the blog post, and probably gone on to make many more of the mistakes it lists. I guess the point I'm trying to make is if you're an aspiring business owner you don't have to go for this high-growth/external investment model. It encourages lax fiscal discipline which is the cause of these mistakes. I sometimes feel people I know who have gone through this could have learned more and earned more by bootstrapping.
- jessedhillon 10y ago
  But this is a conversation about startups.
  - idlewords 10y ago
    Not everyone buys into the redefinition of a startup as a company pursuing massive growth. The word has a broader meaning that encompasses other kinds of strategies for becoming a viable business.
    - chiefalchemist 10y ago
      Starting a business is not the same as a startup. Just like having your own business doesn't make you an entrepreneur. Finally, an idea can be great but that doesn't necessarily make it innovation. Where's the confusion?
      - oblio 10y ago
        > Just like having your own business doesn't make you an entrepreneur. ... http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/entrepreneur http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/entrepreneur
    - jessedhillon 10y ago
      > The word has a broader meaning that encompasses other kinds of strategies Does it really? I don't actually accept that, but around here at least, this is a common enough definition that you should call it out when you're going to deviate from it: A startup is a company designed to grow fast. Being newly founded does not in itself make a company a startup. Nor is it necessary for a startup to work on technology, or take venture funding, or have some sort of "exit." ~ http://www.paulgraham.com/growth.html http://www.paulgraham.com/growth.html
      - idlewords 10y ago
        The word is a regular English word that has a widely accepted meeting outside this message board, and had that meaning for decades before Paul Graham tried to redefine it. [https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/us/start-up https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/us/start-up] Litigating what the correct meaning of "startup" is on HN is not productive, but we should recognize that not everyone agrees with Graham's redefinition, and therefore arguments that cite his essay are begging the question.
        vinceguidry 10y ago
        > Litigating what the correct meaning of "startup" is on HN is not productive I disagree. It's really really really hard to build a business and make it grow. Any logical tools we can use to cut down on the space of strategies and goals worth pursuing is worth its weight in gold. Coming to more restrictive definitions of "startup" does exactly that. More prosaically, if we don't do it ourselves, investors are just going to do it for us and leave us in the dark as to what their real criteria for funding is. We want them to be a part of the conversation because bootstrapping everything sucks. Being needlessly inclusive hurts everybody.
        idlewords 10y ago
        I'm not sure I understand your second paragraph. Could you explain further what you mean, especially about being 'needlessly inclusive'?
- dibstern 10y ago
  The point zdkl was making was that you're not running what people describe as a startup - that is, a high growth, early stage business. And that if you're not running a startup then it is only logical that you are much less likely to 'play startups'. Do you see what he means? Also, you talk about raising money like it's a bad thing. Don't forget that plenty of fiscally responsible high growth companies have raised angel & VC rounds. Just because you take on less responsibility doesn't make you more responsible, as a founder & business owner.
chiefalchemist 10y ago
The WordPress lexicon is fond of taking widely accepted terms and redefining them. This is no surprise.
- rfrey 10y ago
  Every dictionary I just checked (Oxford, Mirriam-Webster, Cambridge) defines startup as "A newly established business". The redefinition (a useful one for many discussions) was by pg to clarify his points in several essays - not by the Wordpress community.
pluma 10y ago
You'll find that outside HN and the Bay area the definition of "startup" tends to be broader than simply "high growth, high risk". It actually feels like there are two conflicting definitions. In tech you often hear people describe companies like AirBnB, Facebook and even Google described as "startups" although they're no longer "early stage" by any means and often have already peaked their growth and surpassed investment needs (though there may still be additional investments happening). Outside it often feels like the label applies to any small service or tech company that was recently founded, period. This is certainly what a lot of "startup" events cater to. And of course there are plenty of companies that would be "startups" in the Bay area sense but failed to find investors and instead ended up bootstrapping and becoming profitable.

by zdkl 10y ago

apatters 10y ago

If I was looking for glamour I would have raised money, started the type of business described in the blog post, and probably gone on to make many more of the mistakes it lists. I guess the point I'm trying to make is if you're an aspiring business owner you don't have to go for this high-growth/external investment model. It encourages lax fiscal discipline which is the cause of these mistakes. I sometimes feel people I know who have gone through this could have learned more and earned more by bootstrapping.

jessedhillon 10y ago
But this is a conversation about startups.
- idlewords 10y ago
  Not everyone buys into the redefinition of a startup as a company pursuing massive growth. The word has a broader meaning that encompasses other kinds of strategies for becoming a viable business.
  - chiefalchemist 10y ago
    Starting a business is not the same as a startup. Just like having your own business doesn't make you an entrepreneur. Finally, an idea can be great but that doesn't necessarily make it innovation. Where's the confusion?
    - oblio 10y ago
      > Just like having your own business doesn't make you an entrepreneur. ... http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/entrepreneur http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/entrepreneur
  - jessedhillon 10y ago
    > The word has a broader meaning that encompasses other kinds of strategies Does it really? I don't actually accept that, but around here at least, this is a common enough definition that you should call it out when you're going to deviate from it: A startup is a company designed to grow fast. Being newly founded does not in itself make a company a startup. Nor is it necessary for a startup to work on technology, or take venture funding, or have some sort of "exit." ~ http://www.paulgraham.com/growth.html http://www.paulgraham.com/growth.html
    - idlewords 10y ago
      The word is a regular English word that has a widely accepted meeting outside this message board, and had that meaning for decades before Paul Graham tried to redefine it. [https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/us/start-up https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/us/start-up] Litigating what the correct meaning of "startup" is on HN is not productive, but we should recognize that not everyone agrees with Graham's redefinition, and therefore arguments that cite his essay are begging the question.
      - vinceguidry 10y ago
        > Litigating what the correct meaning of "startup" is on HN is not productive I disagree. It's really really really hard to build a business and make it grow. Any logical tools we can use to cut down on the space of strategies and goals worth pursuing is worth its weight in gold. Coming to more restrictive definitions of "startup" does exactly that. More prosaically, if we don't do it ourselves, investors are just going to do it for us and leave us in the dark as to what their real criteria for funding is. We want them to be a part of the conversation because bootstrapping everything sucks. Being needlessly inclusive hurts everybody.
        idlewords 10y ago
        I'm not sure I understand your second paragraph. Could you explain further what you mean, especially about being 'needlessly inclusive'?
dibstern 10y ago
The point zdkl was making was that you're not running what people describe as a startup - that is, a high growth, early stage business. And that if you're not running a startup then it is only logical that you are much less likely to 'play startups'. Do you see what he means? Also, you talk about raising money like it's a bad thing. Don't forget that plenty of fiscally responsible high growth companies have raised angel & VC rounds. Just because you take on less responsibility doesn't make you more responsible, as a founder & business owner.

chiefalchemist 10y ago

The WordPress lexicon is fond of taking widely accepted terms and redefining them. This is no surprise.

rfrey 10y ago
Every dictionary I just checked (Oxford, Mirriam-Webster, Cambridge) defines startup as "A newly established business". The redefinition (a useful one for many discussions) was by pg to clarify his points in several essays - not by the Wordpress community.

pluma 10y ago

You'll find that outside HN and the Bay area the definition of "startup" tends to be broader than simply "high growth, high risk". It actually feels like there are two conflicting definitions. In tech you often hear people describe companies like AirBnB, Facebook and even Google described as "startups" although they're no longer "early stage" by any means and often have already peaked their growth and surpassed investment needs (though there may still be additional investments happening). Outside it often feels like the label applies to any small service or tech company that was recently founded, period. This is certainly what a lot of "startup" events cater to. And of course there are plenty of companies that would be "startups" in the Bay area sense but failed to find investors and instead ended up bootstrapping and becoming profitable.