5 ms·

Title should be: I don't want to take VC money and I don't think you do either

by imprettycool 6y ago

kipply 6y ago
I am this close to changing it, this is very good
- fermienrico 6y ago
  I like how according to Silicon Valley, a "Founder" is a person that has borrowed capital from VCs. I live in Silicon Valley and there are more businesses here that are not backed by VCs than otherwise. Tens of thousands of small businesses who work as hard as the top dogs sucking up to VCs, yet they're just businesses with owners, not "Startups" with "Founders". Some people still call Dropbox, Airbnb and Uber as "Startups". I am a little annoyed by this just like I am annoyed by buzzwords of today - AI, crypto (bonus points if you throw in the term - supply-chain), and of course, the new kid on the block - "Quantum". Do you guys not see this and introspect once in a while?
  - thecleaner 6y ago
    A "Founder" is someone who creates their own company with or without VC money. If VC money was a pre requisite then Jeff Bezos wont be a founder.
  - slap_shot 6y ago
    I hear this come up so much and it's just trite. I don't think anybody in Silicon Valley would say the _definition_ of a Founder is someone who takes VC money. All companies require capital to operate. All capital has a cost. In many high growth companies, the amount of time it takes to build a product and go to market has a significant effect of how much market share that company can acquire. Selling equity or taking on debt is how many companies can reduce that time and acquire more market share. It just happens to be that the companies Silicon Valley is most interested in are companies that have to raise capital this way, with very very few exceptions. Now more than ever, VCs will happily tell a a founder "your business is not a business that fits with the VC model well, don't raise VC money." The VCs who say that do not think the people they are are saying that to "aren't founders" - their business just doesn't need VC investment.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
santoshalper 6y ago
I do find it interesting that in spite of the fact that so few companies will ever accept VC money or go public, this model is viewed by many as the dominant or only way to start a tech business. This is in spite of the fact that Technology businesses may very well have the lowest capital requirements of any type of company in history. It was the same way in the 80s with finance. Even though most finance workers were (and are) accountants working boring 9-to-5 corporate jobs, everyone assumed that anyone in finance worked on Wall Street and snorted coke off of strippers in NYC nightclubs every weekend.
- kipply 6y ago
  Yah my feelings about running a startup are completely different for bootstrapped/hacked up companies (I think that's the term?)
  - jaxn 6y ago
    The downsides are still there it takes the same level of commitment, dedication, and obsessive effort to bootstrap. It has taken me 5 years to bootstrap a niche b2b saas to $1m ARR. It is both awesome and terrible.
    - imprettycool 6y ago
      It doesn't have to be stressful or full-commitment. I'm cool with $50k ARR.
      - tonyedgecombe 6y ago
        I'm not even sure revenue is that good of a signal of the work put in. Didn't the Basecamp guys start off on just 10 hours a week inbetween their day job.
        dasil003 6y ago
        By day job do you mean running 37signals the new media design firm at the dawn of the web? I wouldn’t really isolate the “day job” part here, it was sort of the quintessential dogfood SaaS.

Title should be: I don't want to take VC money and I don't think you do either

kipply 6y ago

I am this close to changing it, this is very good

fermienrico 6y ago
I like how according to Silicon Valley, a "Founder" is a person that has borrowed capital from VCs. I live in Silicon Valley and there are more businesses here that are not backed by VCs than otherwise. Tens of thousands of small businesses who work as hard as the top dogs sucking up to VCs, yet they're just businesses with owners, not "Startups" with "Founders". Some people still call Dropbox, Airbnb and Uber as "Startups". I am a little annoyed by this just like I am annoyed by buzzwords of today - AI, crypto (bonus points if you throw in the term - supply-chain), and of course, the new kid on the block - "Quantum". Do you guys not see this and introspect once in a while?
- thecleaner 6y ago
  A "Founder" is someone who creates their own company with or without VC money. If VC money was a pre requisite then Jeff Bezos wont be a founder.
- slap_shot 6y ago
  I hear this come up so much and it's just trite. I don't think anybody in Silicon Valley would say the _definition_ of a Founder is someone who takes VC money. All companies require capital to operate. All capital has a cost. In many high growth companies, the amount of time it takes to build a product and go to market has a significant effect of how much market share that company can acquire. Selling equity or taking on debt is how many companies can reduce that time and acquire more market share. It just happens to be that the companies Silicon Valley is most interested in are companies that have to raise capital this way, with very very few exceptions. Now more than ever, VCs will happily tell a a founder "your business is not a business that fits with the VC model well, don't raise VC money." The VCs who say that do not think the people they are are saying that to "aren't founders" - their business just doesn't need VC investment.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

santoshalper 6y ago

I do find it interesting that in spite of the fact that so few companies will ever accept VC money or go public, this model is viewed by many as the dominant or only way to start a tech business. This is in spite of the fact that Technology businesses may very well have the lowest capital requirements of any type of company in history. It was the same way in the 80s with finance. Even though most finance workers were (and are) accountants working boring 9-to-5 corporate jobs, everyone assumed that anyone in finance worked on Wall Street and snorted coke off of strippers in NYC nightclubs every weekend.

kipply 6y ago
Yah my feelings about running a startup are completely different for bootstrapped/hacked up companies (I think that's the term?)
- jaxn 6y ago
  The downsides are still there it takes the same level of commitment, dedication, and obsessive effort to bootstrap. It has taken me 5 years to bootstrap a niche b2b saas to $1m ARR. It is both awesome and terrible.
  - imprettycool 6y ago
    It doesn't have to be stressful or full-commitment. I'm cool with $50k ARR.
    - tonyedgecombe 6y ago
      I'm not even sure revenue is that good of a signal of the work put in. Didn't the Basecamp guys start off on just 10 hours a week inbetween their day job.
      - dasil003 6y ago
        By day job do you mean running 37signals the new media design firm at the dawn of the web? I wouldn’t really isolate the “day job” part here, it was sort of the quintessential dogfood SaaS.