Games people play with cash flow

This sort of thing is one reason you might want to tax revenues over profits.

Compare https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting , in which all movies show a formal loss and the concept of "profit" as opposed to revenue exists only to scam parties who agree to be paid out of profits.

There are three excellent blog posts here, but mashing them together does not a coherent argument make.

You just described a startup SAAS.

The author creates a false dichotomy when they write that business is either about making profit or managing cash flow.

Making a profit requires cash flow management, but managing cash flow does not require making a profit. This article does talk about managing cash flows in a way that involves never making a profit.

First, and tangentially, it's interesting that real estate developers do this all the time.

Second, it's interesting that this article shows not only why cable companies regional monopolies are extant, but also that their continued existence relies on the preservation of those monopolies.

These and other companies that rely on a strategy of unfettered subscriber growth, in this case leveraged as a marketing tool to creditors to acquire additional debt, is no different than a Ponzi scheme. It makes the fatal assumption that subscriber growth can continue ad infinitum.

But, similar to the amount of free energy in a system, the number of potential subscribers remaining is finite. Eventually, cash flows will fail to meet the projections sold to creditors and established as assumptions in their financial models.

Thus arises a situation that remains tenable only as long as subscribers remain subscribed for as long as is required to service the debt outstanding at the time the growth stopped. Because the debt didn't go anywhere. It hasn't disappeared. Today that debt is sitting on the balance sheet of every one of America's cable providers: the direct result of a flawed line of thinking promoted by the author.

Consider the implications. To remove the regional monopolies of the cable companies is to not only destroy their subscriber base, and thus their cash flows, but also the cash flows promised to their legion creditors. Every one of these creditors now has a vested interest in the preservation of those monopolies, having themselves extended and received credit based on said promises of payment.

I propose that, contrary to the statements of the author, the proof presented by their friend is not "framed incorrectly". Rather, it shows something the author doesn't wish to see.

Great Article. A lot of people don't understand how important cash flow is. Even Elon pointed out that having factories close to customer is very important for a fast growing company like TSLA because if you grow too fast you'll be putting so many cars on boats before they are paid for that you will have no cash.

I disagree with the framing of both articles somewhat. The question should be "What is limiting your growth?" Is raising money going to distract you from making a product customers need and love? Then skip it. If being too small for enterprises to take you seriously is a blocker then you'll need to raise money.