4 ms·

As a Nordic entrepreneur. None of the reasons sounds right reasons to me. https://econ.arizona.edu/sites/econ/files/econ-wp-10-07.pdf https://econ.arizona.edu/s

As a Nordic entrepreneur. None of the reasons sounds right reasons to me. https://econ.arizona.edu/sites/econ/files/econ-wp-10-07.pdf https://econ.arizona.edu/sites/econ/files/econ-wp-10-07.pdf The real problem for startups is the lack of American style VC funding. European startups need to get profitable much earlier than US startups. Early funding for startups is OKish. You can grow from 0 to 10-50 million, but after that it's better to sell the business to some big international firm, because you really struggle getting smart money that the ability to take the big risk. Apple has been very good at buying out European startups. They got bargain prices for sleep monitoring, eye tracking, and computer vision startups in the last year.

poulsbohemian 8y ago
>The real problem for startups is the lack of American style VC funding. European startups need to get profitable much earlier than US startups. This is a common refrain, but the reality is that VC is both out of reach and not the right fit for the vast majority of US ventures. Likewise, knowing the number of firms that get VC but will collapse anyway, I often wonder if it is a benefit that in other countries there is a slower, more profit-driven path that would seem to build legitimate companies for the long run rather than vehicles that border on financial engineering in the name of short-term potential success.
- Nokinside 8y ago
  > ight fit for the vast majority of US ventures. It absolutely should not be. It makes no sense to provide high-risk big dollars to majority of anything. The name "startup" means different things for different people. Paul Graham definition for startup means salable hyper-growth. Platform economies like Google, Amazon, FB, Twitter, grow trough network effects. The reason why US leads in this new economy is because they have their eye in winning big. One big hit justifies losing lots of money in 100 mediocre startups or low growth enterprises.

poulsbohemian 8y ago

>The real problem for startups is the lack of American style VC funding. European startups need to get profitable much earlier than US startups. This is a common refrain, but the reality is that VC is both out of reach and not the right fit for the vast majority of US ventures. Likewise, knowing the number of firms that get VC but will collapse anyway, I often wonder if it is a benefit that in other countries there is a slower, more profit-driven path that would seem to build legitimate companies for the long run rather than vehicles that border on financial engineering in the name of short-term potential success.

Nokinside 8y ago
> ight fit for the vast majority of US ventures. It absolutely should not be. It makes no sense to provide high-risk big dollars to majority of anything. The name "startup" means different things for different people. Paul Graham definition for startup means salable hyper-growth. Platform economies like Google, Amazon, FB, Twitter, grow trough network effects. The reason why US leads in this new economy is because they have their eye in winning big. One big hit justifies losing lots of money in 100 mediocre startups or low growth enterprises.