4 ms·
[flagged]
by bo1024 1y ago
[flagged]
- echelon 1y agoIt's not dishonest. It's opportunity cost.
- rco8786 1y agoI mean. It’s just reality lol. We need money. We tailor our deck to what investors want to hear.
- jeffreygoesto 1y agoBut why do you want them in your business and will have to cash them out someday? Why not organically grow and own your business?
- rco8786 1y agoBecause that’s not feasible for our product. It’s the whole reason investors exist in the first place.
- mystified5016 1y agoBecause that's simply not how business works
- hluska 1y agoNot all businesses can survive that model.
- bigstrat2003 1y agoI would argue that any business which cannot survive that model is a business that should not exist. If you can't grow organically over time with your profits, chances are you aren't making anything actually useful or worthwhile.
- rco8786 1y agoThat’s pretty silly. Not every business can be started and reach profitability without upfront capital. Even if they did that doesn’t mean it’s bad for a company to take investments to scale faster. Economies of scale are a real thing
- hock_ads_ad_hoc 1y agoThey have to seek vc funding to grow because one of their competitors will. If they don’t, they will lose the market to the vc backed hyper scaler.
- msteffen 1y ago…first of all, what about every business that isn’t software? Restaurants need to secure a lease and buy equipment. Manufacturing anything requires you to build a factory. Then, is it so far-fetched to imagine a software business that needs to write a bunch of code before it can start selling?
- intended 1y agoTheres a lot of conditions for this to be a good ideas, but - Typically you can grow at rate X, over time. If you raise enough money to buy someone else, you can grow at maybe 2X. If you can raise money, at a low cost, which allows you to grow NOW, as opposed to grow later ? All things being equal, this is the better choice. NB: This is a toy model, terms and conditions apply.
- candiddevmike 1y agoSounds like securities fraud
- rco8786 1y agoIt would be fraud if we were lying about any of it, but we’re not. That’s why we’re trying to find AI use cases instead of just making up some BS.
- lucianbr 1y agoSBF or Elizabeth Holmes or Madoff could say the exact same thing. I am convinced they thought the exact same thing.
- rco8786 1y agoThere’s such an enormous divide between tailoring a pitch deck to the investor to highlight the things they want to see and outright fraud I don’t even know where to begin with it.
- throwaway314155 1y agoUser describes dishonest ecosystem. Gets upvotes. Another user expresses empathy that they're trapped in said dishonest ecosystem (which is inarguably dishonest)? Downvotes. Don't change HN.
- hluska 1y agoI downvoted that comment because efficiency is a very specific term with a precise meaning in markets.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- bo1024 1y agoIn efficient capital markets, a good business (they claimed to already be successful) would get funded without needing to add empty hype, don’t you think?
- rco8786 1y agoI did not perceive it as empathy fwiw
- drdrek 1y agoMarket are efficient-ish which is probably as good as it gets, if your framework cant account for dishonesty its not a very useful tool to analyze human endeavors
- hluska 1y agoA truly efficient market would be one where all public and private information is incorporated into price. There’s no room to beat the market in an efficient market. Venture capital is definitely not an efficient market. But I’m not sure what your point is.