3 ms·
I think Stan is just pointing out that a startup which is not making money should not be called a business. And when we consider a startup to be a "young" busin
by mjnaus 18y ago
I think Stan is just pointing out that a startup which is not making money should not be called a business. And when we consider a startup to be a "young" business, the author has a good point.
90% of the "startups" we see passing by here on HN, should be considered projects. And some of those projects might turn into a business (startup) some day...
- swombat 18y agoI think that's not a fair definition. A start-up which doesn't have any concrete and realistic plans for how they'll make money is not a business, granted, but there are plenty of ways to create a business that is solid and yet requires a development period before it starts turning a profit or even making any money. A start-up which cannot make money should not be called a business. A start-up which has a clear plan for how they'll make money (e.g. by charging for an SaaS product) but hasn't finished building it yet can be called a business, and the creation of a formal business affords many protections that are useful to a business... and so a business should definitely be created to represent those kinds of start-ups.