In some cases, that's the choice, especially when the company isn't profitable, or is barely so. In this case, though, it seems #2 wasn't a major risk. Or at le

In some cases, that's the choice, especially when the company isn't profitable, or is barely so. In this case, though, it seems #2 wasn't a major risk. Or at least the founder claims in this thread that it wasn't: he describes it as a sustainable, growing company on sound financial footing, which didn't sell out of necessity.