3 ms·

It's not at all as simple as a "rational choice". It completely depends on your objective. Why did you start the business in the first place? If it was to make

It's not at all as simple as a "rational choice". It completely depends on your objective. Why did you start the business in the first place? If it was to make a few mill and never have to work again, sure, sell. If you wanted to build something bigger than yourself, work with great people, feel accomplished, then why sell? How is that few mill going to get you those things? A lot of founders regret their first sale because they realise they didn't want a cashout, they wanted to build something awesome

comprev 3y ago
To back this view up there are plenty of artists who openly admit they "break even" when they've sold a 300-batch of records. The operating costs include buying instruments/software/hardware, using a mastering service and pressing vinyl - all of which are not cheap. They do it for the love of producing music - and watching their work sell out within _minutes_ of being released... which in turn inspires them to make another record (or ten haha!)
- amrocha 3y ago
  I'm not dismissing that, but most artists sell out given the chance. The thing is that the gap between "breaking even" and "life changing money" is huge for most artists. You wouldn't sell out for 50K per year, but 1M? Sell out for 2 years and you're set for life, then you can go back to making the music you love. But very few artists can pull 1M per year, so it doesn't happen as often.
Tao3300 3y ago
> feel accomplished Believe it or not you can buy that. Though I'm sure there's some corporate backed, non-replicable, behavioral science study that says otherwise.
- willsmith72 3y ago
  I choose not, can you convince me otherwise?
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > Believe it or not you can buy that I don't believe it. That is, I believe it's true for some people, but not all. It's not true for me. Buying stuff is not an accomplishment.
amrocha 3y ago
A few mil won't get you those things, but they'll guarantee your basic necessities. For example, my dad is working into his 70s. If I could fund his retirement I would. And here's the kicker: you can always go build something bigger than yourself after selling. Having fuck you money means you can make the ethical choice next time. Edit: on your comment about founders regretting their first sale. I'm guessing most founders are also well off, and don't worry as much financially. But even then, regret doesn't mean they made the wrong choice. I regret exercising my Shopify stock while I worked there, but it was still the best decision for me at the time.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > Having fuck you money means you can make the ethical choice next time. If you weren't able to make the "ethical choice" the first time, you almost certainly won't make it the next time, either. All of the motivations that informed your first choice will equally inform your next.
  - amrocha 3y ago
    Calling it the "ethical choice" was a mistake on my part. It's more of an "ethical calculus" between doing right by your family, and doing right by your users. So it's not that choosing your family is unethical, but it does have consequences for your users. If family was taken care of them the ethical calculus shifts in the users favor.
- willsmith72 3y ago
  The people who get to have the option of a multi-multi million dollar exit are the ones who start at the beginning when the company is worth nothing. Most people who can't afford basic necessities also can't afford to take the risk of starting something new. In fact, I would say it's a terrible decision in that case, akin to buying lottery tickets. The far easier way to guarantee "basic necessities" in tech is train up, get a good job, be frugal. You could have enough to never need basic necessities within 10 years, max 20. The vast majority of founders I see are relatively self-sufficient already and live comfortably. They're founders because they're addicted to it, love making something new, and potentially are chasing that mega-exit. 10s-100s of millions, not a few.
heleninboodler 3y ago
> If you wanted to build something bigger than yourself, work with great people, feel accomplished, then why sell? How is that few mill going to get you those things? It's possible that the founders felt they had accomplished this, and after spending 15 (?) years running it, were ready to move onto something else. I've sure as hell never stayed at the same job for 15 years. I'd go nuts. They may have also felt some obligation to early investors, often who are friends and family or early employees, to get them a nice return.
- sitkack 3y ago
  Then sell it to the employees who have a vested interest in maintaining it.
  - heleninboodler 3y ago
    You're expecting a group of startup employees holding illiquid stock to come up with the cash necessary to buy the finders out on a company that could otherwise sell for (apparently) $273 million?
    - sitkack 3y ago
      Sure, depends on how you structure it. They had what, 400 employees, so 675k per employee.

comprev 3y ago

To back this view up there are plenty of artists who openly admit they "break even" when they've sold a 300-batch of records. The operating costs include buying instruments/software/hardware, using a mastering service and pressing vinyl - all of which are not cheap. They do it for the love of producing music - and watching their work sell out within _minutes_ of being released... which in turn inspires them to make another record (or ten haha!)

amrocha 3y ago
I'm not dismissing that, but most artists sell out given the chance. The thing is that the gap between "breaking even" and "life changing money" is huge for most artists. You wouldn't sell out for 50K per year, but 1M? Sell out for 2 years and you're set for life, then you can go back to making the music you love. But very few artists can pull 1M per year, so it doesn't happen as often.

Tao3300 3y ago

> feel accomplished Believe it or not you can buy that. Though I'm sure there's some corporate backed, non-replicable, behavioral science study that says otherwise.

willsmith72 3y ago
I choose not, can you convince me otherwise?
JohnFen 3y ago
> Believe it or not you can buy that I don't believe it. That is, I believe it's true for some people, but not all. It's not true for me. Buying stuff is not an accomplishment.

amrocha 3y ago

A few mil won't get you those things, but they'll guarantee your basic necessities. For example, my dad is working into his 70s. If I could fund his retirement I would. And here's the kicker: you can always go build something bigger than yourself after selling. Having fuck you money means you can make the ethical choice next time. Edit: on your comment about founders regretting their first sale. I'm guessing most founders are also well off, and don't worry as much financially. But even then, regret doesn't mean they made the wrong choice. I regret exercising my Shopify stock while I worked there, but it was still the best decision for me at the time.

JohnFen 3y ago
> Having fuck you money means you can make the ethical choice next time. If you weren't able to make the "ethical choice" the first time, you almost certainly won't make it the next time, either. All of the motivations that informed your first choice will equally inform your next.
- amrocha 3y ago
  Calling it the "ethical choice" was a mistake on my part. It's more of an "ethical calculus" between doing right by your family, and doing right by your users. So it's not that choosing your family is unethical, but it does have consequences for your users. If family was taken care of them the ethical calculus shifts in the users favor.
willsmith72 3y ago
The people who get to have the option of a multi-multi million dollar exit are the ones who start at the beginning when the company is worth nothing. Most people who can't afford basic necessities also can't afford to take the risk of starting something new. In fact, I would say it's a terrible decision in that case, akin to buying lottery tickets. The far easier way to guarantee "basic necessities" in tech is train up, get a good job, be frugal. You could have enough to never need basic necessities within 10 years, max 20. The vast majority of founders I see are relatively self-sufficient already and live comfortably. They're founders because they're addicted to it, love making something new, and potentially are chasing that mega-exit. 10s-100s of millions, not a few.

heleninboodler 3y ago

> If you wanted to build something bigger than yourself, work with great people, feel accomplished, then why sell? How is that few mill going to get you those things? It's possible that the founders felt they had accomplished this, and after spending 15 (?) years running it, were ready to move onto something else. I've sure as hell never stayed at the same job for 15 years. I'd go nuts. They may have also felt some obligation to early investors, often who are friends and family or early employees, to get them a nice return.

sitkack 3y ago
Then sell it to the employees who have a vested interest in maintaining it.
- heleninboodler 3y ago
  You're expecting a group of startup employees holding illiquid stock to come up with the cash necessary to buy the finders out on a company that could otherwise sell for (apparently) $273 million?
  - sitkack 3y ago
    Sure, depends on how you structure it. They had what, 400 employees, so 675k per employee.