4 ms·
> It reads that they raised no external funding whatsoever? It sounds strange now but I suspect for most of history this was true of businesses large and small
by elliekelly 6y ago
> It reads that they raised no external funding whatsoever?
It sounds strange now but I suspect for most of history this was true of businesses large and small. I wonder when external funding became "the rule" for successful companies rather than the exception?
- OJFord 6y agoBank loans used to be more significant and commonplace though. And probably historically it would be (even) more likely to be significantly self-funded as opposed to being all but unfunded and 'bootstrapping', that's my impression anyway.
- dumbfoundded 6y agoBank loans are still used for many more conventional small businesses.
- OJFord 6y agoAbsolutely; I didn't say 'banks used to give loans', just that they used to be more significant (number and magnitude) lenders to businesses; not just high street butchers and the like, but what we would today call a 'start-up' too.
- avarun 6y agoThis is false. How could the common person have possibly had the capital to start their own business without external funding prior to the 20th century? No, they all had to rely on bank loans, which were arbitrary and capricious, as well as required collateral that made it a very risky proposition to start a company. Venture Capital by comparison is a miracle of the modern world, allowing you to start businesses risk-free.