4 ms·
The contemptuous phrase ‘lifestyle business’ is just VCs saying the quiet part out loud. You want to run a company that feeds your family and provides some dece
by throwaway2562 2y ago
The contemptuous phrase ‘lifestyle business’ is just VCs saying the quiet part out loud. You want to run a company that feeds your family and provides some decent stable jobs, indefinitely? You must be a clown, they think.
The other memorably awful/ macho bullshit line I once personally heard when pitching an idea to a young thruster was: “Who gets fired?” by which the guy meant, whose jobs are on the line if you build your business successfully?
Not all games are zero-sum, I had to tell him.
- bunnie 2y agoI think maybe it's the case that the VC's biggest competition for top talent and good ideas are from the innovators that they hope to invest in. If they encourage a thousand lifestyle business bloom, one might turn into a boot-strapped "unicorn" that didn't take their money, so it's in their own interest to make lifestyle businesses seem like a terrible idea. The more talented people are convinced the only way to start a business is with VC, the higher a value VCs can extract from talented people. If we actually had more socially acceptable options, more folks would have the leverage to walk away from the table and shove the VC's non-competes, non-disclosures, preferred shares and meddling board seats in their face.
- PaulHoule 2y agoLately I’ve been a bit depressed by startups I respect going down, most of all post.news which was a refined product developed in one and a half years by a moderate-sized team and funded by Scott Galloway and Andreessen Horowitz. The official statement was that it was not growing fast enough to make it as a consumer product: https://techcrunch.com/2024/04/19/post-news-the-a16z-funded-twitter-alternative-is-shutting-down/ https://techcrunch.com/2024/04/19/post-news-the-a16z-funded-... Though I think there could be more to it than that: (1) the full development of that site would have required cooperation from the news industry that isn’t easy to get and (2) I don’t think they got the word out well because despite star-studded founders and investors and my being interested in that sort of thing (to the extent of doing market research and product analysis for that kind of thing) I never heard about it until the last week…. And that’s for a business much more interesting and innovative that the comparable Threads or Bluesky. From the outside though it seems like 1.5 years is not a lot of time to exhaust the possibilities of growth for a site like that. (As I see it Reddit took more like 3 years for subreddits to become what we know) On the other hand there are the zombie unicorns. I have been watching Temu: I saw the ads, I bought what could be most of my halloween costume this year and two rolls of fox stickers (not sure if that was a mistake or a dark pattern) and a dragon figurine. Almost everything was smaller than I expected and afterwards I got a huge volume of irrelevant but seemingly personalized emails. I think they’re a paper tiger: I can be impressed by their advertising spend but they don’t seem like masters of marketing and algorithms to me. The of course there is Uber and the other ride hailing and food delivery services. Uber has spent over $25 billion on giving subsidized taxi rides and there is no end in sight. Even at American prices, $25 billion could have built a lot of subway or light rail but Uber won’t leave such a legacy. Or if it does it will be breaking the economics of both chain and independent restaurants who have reshaped their businesses around a delivery business for which the economics doesn’t really work. The strength of VC is it can make it bets like Temu and Uber but that can be very much a finger trap.
- jprete 2y agoIt occurs to me that one reason we have such a winner-take-all tech economy might be that VCs don't want anything else to exist.
- PaulHoule 2y agoI think of the $15 billion sale of WhatsApp to Facebook. On one hand that seems like a great outcome to founders and VCs, but from the viewpoint of Facebook it is like extortion. I suspect Facebook uses every kind of influence it has to suppress the next WhatsApp because they don’t want to be doing that every two years or so, particularly when prices for things like that go up over time and not down.
- gcanyon 2y agoHa -- I would be a good candidate customer for post.news, and you've known about it (checks the post above) a week longer than I have :-)
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]