5 ms·
Pulling from an old blog post, I don't see any inconsistency. http://tom.preston-werner.com/2010/10/18/optimize-for-happiness.html http://tom.preston-werner.co
by nostromo 14y ago
Pulling from an old blog post, I don't see any inconsistency.
http://tom.preston-werner.com/2010/10/18/optimize-for-happiness.html http://tom.preston-werner.com/2010/10/18/optimize-for-happin...
> The ironic thing about bootstrapping and venture capital is that once you demonstrate some success, investors will come to YOU. When this happens you will be in a much better place to make a more reasoned choice about taking on additional capital and all the complexities that come with it. Talking to VCs with some leverage in your back pocket is an entirely different game from throwing yourself in front of a conference table full of general partners and trying to persuade them that you're worth their time and money. Power is happiness.
- why-el 14y agoI don't see any inconsistency whatsoever between the post you link to and what just happened. Tom was clearly talking about early funding, essentially when you just started, and how that can affect your product and its future. The fact that they raised that much actually proves Tom's point: That you should approach VC money from a strong position, which you can't reach if you start off with VCs watching over you. Update: This post[1] (Above for the moment) says it better. [1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4220725 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4220725
- nostromo 14y agoPerhaps you misread my comment? I specifically say, "I don't see any inconsistency."
- why-el 14y agoyes I indeed did misread your comment. Sorry about that! I read a couple of threads here and there and the number of comments raising this issue was increasing, so my eye only caught the inconsistency part of it. Sorry again.