12 ms·

I don't know if this thread is a good idea, but the timing is certainly good for me. Yesterday, I got modded down to -7 for suggesting that a company like 37sig

by asdflkj 19y ago

I don't know if this thread is a good idea, but the timing is certainly good for me. Yesterday, I got modded down to -7 for suggesting that a company like 37signals isn't a startup. A startup is a business whose primary aim is growth. If you focus on revenue, you do so at the expense of growth, because people prefer free stuff over non-free stuff. Could someone explain to me why I'm wrong? (I am not saying this rhetorically, by the way. If we assume that this community is as smart as everyone says it is, then I must be wrong.)

danw 19y ago
Where is the line between startup and small business?
- wlievens 19y ago
  Well, the author topic you replied to specifies a pretty clear line: either your focus is growth, or it is revenue. One can agree or disagree, but it's a relatively clear line.
pchristensen 19y ago
Maybe it rubbed people the wrong way right after DHH's talk at Startup School. Six weeks ago, I got 3000 page views (mostly from Hacker News) and 24 karma for an article where I made the exact same assertion (37s isn't a startup), and not one person complained about the characterization: "Facebook is a startup - a huge and wildly successful one, but until they find their killer revenue model, they’re living off of investment money. 37signals is not a startup - they were profitable from web design consulting while they developed Basecamp, Rails, etc, and now their products fund their business without outside investment. Fog Creek was a startup (living off of Joel’s MSFT cash) until FogBugz took off, and now revenue from that product runs their business. Google is a business, but until they perfected AdWords and Adsense (2002? 2003?), they were like Facebook is now, a really big successful startup. YouTube went from startup to acquisition and never was a business." http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=130757 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=130757 http://www.pchristensen.com/blog/articles/hacker-vs-engineer-know-the-difference/ http://www.pchristensen.com/blog/articles/hacker-vs-engineer...
mixmax 19y ago
"If you focus on revenue, you do so at the expense of growth" Only to a certain extent - there are many companies that both grow and focus on revenue. And personally I think that this is a much better strategy for two reasons: 1) If you don't get funding or get acquired you still have a business. And since probably less than 1% of startups make this cut it seems like a good bet. 2) If you create revenue from day one your customers are your main priority. If you are always looking for more funding to grow your focus shifts to acquiring capital, and your goals shift accordingly. It is more important to have a whole bunch of freeloaders than to have returning paying customers.
concealed 19y ago
What you did wrong? You broke our chain of groupthink! How dare you!!1one! [insert jealousy for company with no business model] [troll complete]

by asdflkj 19y ago

danw 19y ago

Where is the line between startup and small business?

wlievens 19y ago
Well, the author topic you replied to specifies a pretty clear line: either your focus is growth, or it is revenue. One can agree or disagree, but it's a relatively clear line.

pchristensen 19y ago

Maybe it rubbed people the wrong way right after DHH's talk at Startup School. Six weeks ago, I got 3000 page views (mostly from Hacker News) and 24 karma for an article where I made the exact same assertion (37s isn't a startup), and not one person complained about the characterization: "Facebook is a startup - a huge and wildly successful one, but until they find their killer revenue model, they’re living off of investment money. 37signals is not a startup - they were profitable from web design consulting while they developed Basecamp, Rails, etc, and now their products fund their business without outside investment. Fog Creek was a startup (living off of Joel’s MSFT cash) until FogBugz took off, and now revenue from that product runs their business. Google is a business, but until they perfected AdWords and Adsense (2002? 2003?), they were like Facebook is now, a really big successful startup. YouTube went from startup to acquisition and never was a business." http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=130757 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=130757 http://www.pchristensen.com/blog/articles/hacker-vs-engineer-know-the-difference/ http://www.pchristensen.com/blog/articles/hacker-vs-engineer...

mixmax 19y ago

"If you focus on revenue, you do so at the expense of growth" Only to a certain extent - there are many companies that both grow and focus on revenue. And personally I think that this is a much better strategy for two reasons: 1) If you don't get funding or get acquired you still have a business. And since probably less than 1% of startups make this cut it seems like a good bet. 2) If you create revenue from day one your customers are your main priority. If you are always looking for more funding to grow your focus shifts to acquiring capital, and your goals shift accordingly. It is more important to have a whole bunch of freeloaders than to have returning paying customers.

concealed 19y ago

What you did wrong? You broke our chain of groupthink! How dare you!!1one! [insert jealousy for company with no business model] [troll complete]