13 ms·
The truth is a lot of startups get started using unethical tactics. A reason so many startups fail is because unethical methods fly over their head, they don’t
by xwdv 6y ago
The truth is a lot of startups get started using unethical tactics.
A reason so many startups fail is because unethical methods fly over their head, they don’t even consider them. Meanwhile, competitors are juicing up their startups by using shady gray hat or black hat growth hacks. It’s like body building competitions where the serious competitors are all using steroids. If you’re just coming in all natural you will likely do poorly.
The reason black hat growth hacks work so well is because the marketing channels are not yet closed or saturated. A marketing channel is most effective when competitors are not yet using it, and since many startups are unwilling to do something unethical, there is a big window of opportunity available before it gets shut down or patched by some authority.
Frankly if you really want to build a successful tech startup you should get comfortable with the idea of doing the wrong thing first and then seeking redemption later when you’ve accumulated some wealth than to try and do the right thing from the beginning and die a pauper because someone else ate your lunch doing shady things or misrepresenting themselves. If you’re not willing to cast ethics aside to be successful then you obviously care more about being ethical than being successful, so don’t be surprised if you end up a failure.
The only time I would support going 100% legit is if you could guarantee every competitor would do the same, and I’m not aware of any scenario where that would be true.
- Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y agoWithout ethics any "success" is forever tainted by fraud. Going legit is a lie the ethically bankrupt tell themselves to further justify their insatiable addiction. By limiting yourself to just below your competitors depths you resign yourself to race to the darkest depths of depravity in a vain quest to aquire resources one lacks the ethics to use equitably dooming your victims, peers, and community to further victimizations.
- ByteJockey 6y agoSo? That's not a rhetorical question. xwdv seems to have rejected moral purity as a driving principal or at the very least (being more charitable), has stated that people who wish to be successful should reject moral purity as a driving principal. I don't quite understand the argument, since it seems to rest on something the OP has already cast aside.
- Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y agoI'm questioning their definition of success and what that "success" matters when they reach their goals without any ethical principles? I'd like this person to elucidate why moral purity (not doing things like murder, assault, fraud, theft, etc) is antithetical to success and explain why people who practice this aren't universally a danger to the common (wo)man and organized society? Their argument is essentially that not only is it okay to rob, embezzle, murder and lie to reach their goal, but that since you competition is you should either become a criminal or prepare for failure. I'd rather not live in a world where people who survive this way are celebrated.
- xwdv 6y agoYou’re living in it now. Success for a lot of startups isn’t really anything noble, it basically just means making a lot of money.
- Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y agoYes and? Whenever possible I choose not to give such companies my money. Obviously it's hard when virtually every major company in existence is unethical. By redefining success to mean lots of money corporate standards are regressing and that's extremely concerning. This trend has cause caused immeasurableharm to society and most people are pretending like everything is fine.
- xwdv 6y agoBecause it is fine. Even good things can come from unethical companies, such as well paying jobs for people to feed their families and amazing products and services that improve people’s lives. No use in getting rattled by how the sausage gets made.
- bartread 6y agoI don't understand why this comment is getting slagged. It's pretty well understood. Even well respected entrepreneurs like Richard Branson did shady stuff to get started. To the inevitable downvoters: yes, I'm time poor and too lazy to type it all out so you'll have to spend a few seconds Googling to find the stories. Boo-hoo for you.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- ojnabieoot 6y agoTo be clear: you are currently being downvoted for the rude and immature part at the end, and not because you didn’t provide citations.
- ysavir 6y agoI haven't downvoted it myself, but I imagine it's due to GP's tonality of "you should do illegal and unethical things" rather than "start ups doing illegal and unethical things is an unfortunately common practice".
- nicoburns 6y ago> Even well respected entrepreneurs like Richard Branson did shady stuff to get started. I'm not sure I'd consider Richard Branson well respected. There are a lot of people who dislike him here in the UK, precisely because of the shady stuff.
- selimthegrim 6y agoObama seems fine with him.
- xwdv 6y agoRespect and admiration are two different things. It would probably be wise to show respect in the presence of someone who won’t hesitate to cut your head off, if you care about staying alive. Doesn’t mean you have to like them.
- tonyedgecombe 6y agoI must remember not to do business with you.