4 ms·
When I read you're comment, I am not getting many positive vibes about those startups. Contrast the language. With traditional businesses you have positive te
by II2II 6y ago
When I read you're comment, I am not getting many positive vibes about those startups.
Contrast the language. With traditional businesses you have positive terms like profitable, sustainable, and solid. With the startups you evoke terms like hyper growth, magic formula, and (from other people's posts in a similar vein) disruptive. It makes the traditional businesses sound like they are directed towards long term objectives as well as societal needs like stable employment and viable products. It also makes the startups sound self-serving. These are people who take a gamble for a disproportionate return. They are primarily interested in the short term, so they end up being parasitic. They aren't providing society with things like stable jobs or products that will have a lasting impact. Claiming that a business is disruptive does not really fix that, since a business can only be disruptive if the gamble pays off.
Perhaps society should be looking towards more traditional approaches to entrepreneurship if we are to have a chance to fix our woes. Yes, I understand that it had its issues. On the other hand, these gambles on hyper growth are consuming a significant amount of investment dollars for outcomes that are of dubious merit.
Edit: made the second half of the second paragraph less of a grammatical mess.
- Apocryphon 6y agoIt makes them sound like the business equivalent of mad scientists, or at least alchemists and water-witchers.