4 ms·

Right, but I think Mark's point was that great companies can also be built slowly. These may not be the "best" companies but great one's can be built brick-by-b

by akg 14y ago

Right, but I think Mark's point was that great companies can also be built slowly. These may not be the "best" companies but great one's can be built brick-by-brick. I feel that most startup founders today strive for a large funding round before focusing on building a solid business foundation. For some businesses, it is not possible to create value until you have a large amount of capital in-hand (e.g., Aerospace, Automobiles) but for most it is and we shouldn't lose sight of that. People solve problems, not money; and it is unlikely that a large pile of cash will be the solution to your problems if you don't first start with a good business model.

eirikm 14y ago
Reminds me of this article. http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000056.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000056.html
- sayemm 14y ago
  Thanks, that was a great read. And therein lies the big risk-reward decision as an entrepreneur. I think that decision rests most heavily on whether you've got product-market fit or it's very clear to you that this is a land-grab opportunity, and you must move quickly. Either way, funding should always be looked at as a huge accelerator. Sometimes you could start off slowly, then once the model's figured out and growth necessitates it, pull out the big guns with lots of funding to scale up (e.g. Facebook, Github, Zynga), or you make a really high risk-reward bet from the get-go like Amazon did (then again, that was also during the 90s, and it was smart since it filled a huge hole and everyone was moving fast towards dominating the internet space). Very different environment today... I think we're going to see more and more Github scenarios in this recession. And a lot of bloodshed for startup founders trying the Amazon model today.
StavrosK 14y ago
Oh, in that case, I am in absolute agreement.
sayemm 14y ago
Exactly. Funding is only a means to an end, and all too often startups forget that. Even if you look at the Google, Facebook, and Microsofts of the world you'll see that they were very lean to begin with and proved their market before scaling up with funding. The money line in his post: "The reality is that for most businesses, they don’t need more cash, they need more brains."

by akg 14y ago

eirikm 14y ago

Reminds me of this article. http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000056.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000056.html

sayemm 14y ago
Thanks, that was a great read. And therein lies the big risk-reward decision as an entrepreneur. I think that decision rests most heavily on whether you've got product-market fit or it's very clear to you that this is a land-grab opportunity, and you must move quickly. Either way, funding should always be looked at as a huge accelerator. Sometimes you could start off slowly, then once the model's figured out and growth necessitates it, pull out the big guns with lots of funding to scale up (e.g. Facebook, Github, Zynga), or you make a really high risk-reward bet from the get-go like Amazon did (then again, that was also during the 90s, and it was smart since it filled a huge hole and everyone was moving fast towards dominating the internet space). Very different environment today... I think we're going to see more and more Github scenarios in this recession. And a lot of bloodshed for startup founders trying the Amazon model today.

StavrosK 14y ago

Oh, in that case, I am in absolute agreement.

sayemm 14y ago

Exactly. Funding is only a means to an end, and all too often startups forget that. Even if you look at the Google, Facebook, and Microsofts of the world you'll see that they were very lean to begin with and proved their market before scaling up with funding. The money line in his post: "The reality is that for most businesses, they don’t need more cash, they need more brains."