5 ms·

"lifestyle business" is really just a small business that works, is self-sustaining, and not overly bloated to attempt to make obscene amounts of $$$. I feel l

"lifestyle business" is really just a small business that works, is self-sustaining, and not overly bloated to attempt to make obscene amounts of $$$. I feel like this is exactly what most companies should strive for. They'll make better decisions that way.

trhway 8y ago
>"lifestyle business" is really just a small business that works, is self-sustaining, and not overly bloated to attempt to make obscene amounts of $$$. I guess it sounds too bourgeois for the young (and not so) SV rebels who are in to change the world and make some billions along the way.
ian0 8y ago
Isnt a "lifestyle" business a business to support the lifestyle of the founder? IE money is not typically a problem, either the company is profitable or the founder will support it loss making. The main function of the company is to keep the founder entertained more than anything else. There are a lot of companies like this (big & small), though sometimes its not recognisable from the outside. Note the goal is still ostensibly to make money. You don't run a business when you could have retired if you don't love growing businesses. I cant imagine a founder turning down an offer to expand rapidly, if it made sense. They just tend to avoiding going all in on a particular bet and for obvious reasons don't like ceeding control to outside investors.
- pandapower2 8y ago
  >Isnt a "lifestyle" business a business to support the lifestyle of the founder? IE money is not typically a problem, either the company is profitable or the founder will support it loss making. The main function of the company is to keep the founder entertained more than anything else. I don't think I've heard the phrase lifestyle business used that way. I'm not in the US let alone silicon valley so that might be relevant. Rather I've heard lifestyle business used to describe a business, typically with zero to half a dozen employees, which the founder can run without putting in a whole bunch of time. A real but deliberately vague example. A company that acts as an authorized dealer for a manufacturer. The sales company handles the sales process and takes orders through a website supplemented with phone calls. Actually shipping the merchandise and handling after sales customer support is done by the manufacturer. Why they don't want to do their own sales I don't know. Staffing requirements are one person to answer any phone calls and someone to do the books. Owner's required time is maybe a few hours a day. Commissions on sales cover all the bills etc and let the owner pay themselves handsomely but it will never be a giant enterprise.
TAForObvReasons 8y ago
The great Scott McNealy quote about Sun really resonated with me: > We kicked butt, had fun, didn't cheat, loved our customers and changed computing forever ... and in many ways, it seems like only a "lifestyle business" can really prioritize those over core revenue and growth metrics. Bryan Cantrill's discussion is also great: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=2000 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=2000
themoat 8y ago
Reminds me of this talk from Vincent Woo (creator of Coderpad) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8UwcyYT3z0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8UwcyYT3z0 Really made me rethink my priorities and has had me change the kinds of things I do.
- ironchief 8y ago
  Wow, he called the HelloSign acquisition in 2015. His other two suggestions (native search and messaging) are still in limbo.
ilamont 8y ago
Most businesses should strive to be self-sustaining. And if they make obscene amounts of money, all the power to them. What I dislike is A) the view from startup land that there are only two types of new businesses, "startups" and everything else ("lifestyle") B) and the "everything else" category is somehow inferior or even some sort of hobby or vanity project. Sahil used the term to describe his own company, and at one point felt shame about it, even though he had a real business with real customers and real revenue. That's how twisted the mindset in startup land has become, where real business owners are supposed to feel shame, and "success" is based on as-yet unfulfilled promises and raising a round?
- anongraddebt 8y ago
  I agree about the unjustifiable dichotomy much of the tech scene holds between "startups" and everything else (as you describe it). I think it's funny, though, that non-tech industry leaders critiqued Bezos in the past for running a 'lifestyle business' when in fact Amazon was always a technology company and has become dominant and successful to boot.
  - umeshunni 8y ago
    Not to mention that Amazon has returned more to investors over the last 10 years than many startups and Unicorns have.
- Zanni 8y ago
  There's a legit distinction, though, between startups and other businesses - startups are designed to grow fast. [0] That doesn't mean they're better, but you have to know the difference or you're going to get yourself in trouble. Is a quarter-horse better than a camel? Yes, if you're trying to win a quarter-mile race; not so much if you're trying to survive in the desert. I think some of the disdain comes from legit growth startups trying to distance themselves from one-man "startups" that could be better categorized as micro-ISVs or side projects. But there's definitely no shame to running a successful lifestyle business. The 37signals guys have been great at shifting that perspective. [0] http://www.paulgraham.com/growth.html http://www.paulgraham.com/growth.html
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

trhway 8y ago

>"lifestyle business" is really just a small business that works, is self-sustaining, and not overly bloated to attempt to make obscene amounts of $$$. I guess it sounds too bourgeois for the young (and not so) SV rebels who are in to change the world and make some billions along the way.

ian0 8y ago

Isnt a "lifestyle" business a business to support the lifestyle of the founder? IE money is not typically a problem, either the company is profitable or the founder will support it loss making. The main function of the company is to keep the founder entertained more than anything else. There are a lot of companies like this (big & small), though sometimes its not recognisable from the outside. Note the goal is still ostensibly to make money. You don't run a business when you could have retired if you don't love growing businesses. I cant imagine a founder turning down an offer to expand rapidly, if it made sense. They just tend to avoiding going all in on a particular bet and for obvious reasons don't like ceeding control to outside investors.

pandapower2 8y ago
>Isnt a "lifestyle" business a business to support the lifestyle of the founder? IE money is not typically a problem, either the company is profitable or the founder will support it loss making. The main function of the company is to keep the founder entertained more than anything else. I don't think I've heard the phrase lifestyle business used that way. I'm not in the US let alone silicon valley so that might be relevant. Rather I've heard lifestyle business used to describe a business, typically with zero to half a dozen employees, which the founder can run without putting in a whole bunch of time. A real but deliberately vague example. A company that acts as an authorized dealer for a manufacturer. The sales company handles the sales process and takes orders through a website supplemented with phone calls. Actually shipping the merchandise and handling after sales customer support is done by the manufacturer. Why they don't want to do their own sales I don't know. Staffing requirements are one person to answer any phone calls and someone to do the books. Owner's required time is maybe a few hours a day. Commissions on sales cover all the bills etc and let the owner pay themselves handsomely but it will never be a giant enterprise.

TAForObvReasons 8y ago

The great Scott McNealy quote about Sun really resonated with me: > We kicked butt, had fun, didn't cheat, loved our customers and changed computing forever ... and in many ways, it seems like only a "lifestyle business" can really prioritize those over core revenue and growth metrics. Bryan Cantrill's discussion is also great: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=2000 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=2000

themoat 8y ago

Reminds me of this talk from Vincent Woo (creator of Coderpad) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8UwcyYT3z0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8UwcyYT3z0 Really made me rethink my priorities and has had me change the kinds of things I do.

ironchief 8y ago
Wow, he called the HelloSign acquisition in 2015. His other two suggestions (native search and messaging) are still in limbo.

ilamont 8y ago

Most businesses should strive to be self-sustaining. And if they make obscene amounts of money, all the power to them. What I dislike is A) the view from startup land that there are only two types of new businesses, "startups" and everything else ("lifestyle") B) and the "everything else" category is somehow inferior or even some sort of hobby or vanity project. Sahil used the term to describe his own company, and at one point felt shame about it, even though he had a real business with real customers and real revenue. That's how twisted the mindset in startup land has become, where real business owners are supposed to feel shame, and "success" is based on as-yet unfulfilled promises and raising a round?

anongraddebt 8y ago
I agree about the unjustifiable dichotomy much of the tech scene holds between "startups" and everything else (as you describe it). I think it's funny, though, that non-tech industry leaders critiqued Bezos in the past for running a 'lifestyle business' when in fact Amazon was always a technology company and has become dominant and successful to boot.
- umeshunni 8y ago
  Not to mention that Amazon has returned more to investors over the last 10 years than many startups and Unicorns have.
Zanni 8y ago
There's a legit distinction, though, between startups and other businesses - startups are designed to grow fast. [0] That doesn't mean they're better, but you have to know the difference or you're going to get yourself in trouble. Is a quarter-horse better than a camel? Yes, if you're trying to win a quarter-mile race; not so much if you're trying to survive in the desert. I think some of the disdain comes from legit growth startups trying to distance themselves from one-man "startups" that could be better categorized as micro-ISVs or side projects. But there's definitely no shame to running a successful lifestyle business. The 37signals guys have been great at shifting that perspective. [0] http://www.paulgraham.com/growth.html http://www.paulgraham.com/growth.html

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]