Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My Startup has 30 Days to Live

mystartuphas30daystolive.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 239 posts

Re: My Startup has 30 Days to Live

#181

Post by SomeCallMeTim »

enraged_camel wrote: post #133
dkrich wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And why isn't a barber shop a startup? Great Clips and Super Cuts were once new, fledgling businesses. Not charging money, taking VC investment, joining an incubator, and creating a stupid name that ends in "fy" or "ly" a startup does not make. BTW, I've read the essay. I like most of what he writes, but I have a fundamental disagreement on this one and just because it comes from the hands of PG does not make it gosp…

You are free to disagree with PG. Doing so doesn't change the fact that he is the sort of authority who gets cited in Wikipedia articles on the topic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Startup_company The term "startup" originated during the dot-com bubble. The very origin of the term means it is supposed to apply primarily to new tech companies who are designed to grow fast. A barber shop is not a startup. It is a small…

Webster says "a fledgling business enterprise," and sites as its first use 1845. [1]

Unless there's another dot-com bubble that happened 150 years earlier than the one I know about, I think you're pretty well wrong about the etymology.

Within the HN-bubble, people may define "startup" to be "VC-backed-startup, but the term does have a meaning outside of that bubble. I call my own company a "startup", and I have no plans to seek out a slot in an incubator or investment from VC.

[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/start-up

Re: My Startup has 30 Days to Live

#182

Post by nostrademons »

frogpelt wrote: post #176
tptacek wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we understand that you believe businesses that don't aim for shoot-the-moon growth shouldn't call themselves "startups". The problem is, not everybody agrees with you. I've done both kinds of companies and don't think growth trajectory is the defining feature of a "startup". I'm also not particularly interested in debating the point, since it has very little to do with the story we're commenting on. (I also u…

It doesn't appear that greghinch was harping on the semantics. He's harping on the frustration about investors getting to call the shots on feature X or schedule Y. As I understand it, that's the startup game. If you want to call the shots and build your own dream, don't take the money. Makes perfect sense to me.

Except it's not the startup game. Larry and Sergey got to call the shots with Google (much to their investors' chagrin). Zuckerburg got to call the shots with Facebook. Both of those were high-growth startups that took VC money. They got to call the shots because they were high-growth companies with a lot of leverage.

The startups where the VCs end up calling the shots are the ones that are on bootstrapped revenue and user-acquisition trajectories but with VC funding. You have no leverage in that situation, because they provided all the money and you're providing...nothing useful at the moment. If you're careful about taking VC funding only once you've validated the market and your ability to execute against that market, the investors don't even want to call the shots, because if they just let you be they'll make a whole lot of money for zero effort.

Re: My Startup has 30 Days to Live

#183

Post by benologist »

greghinch wrote: post #114
ihaveajob wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Not the OP) I've read PG's article, and it makes sense, but it narrowly fits YC's model and leaves out lean, bootstrapped companies. For that reason, I prefer Steve Blank's definition: "An organization in search of a repeatable, scalable business model". There's a good discussion here: http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-definition-of-a-startup

That sounds more like the definition of a franchise business. Which may or may not be a startup as well, depending on how you go after growth

You're far too concerned with a (buzz)word that loosely fits many, many businesses and definitions and isn't as exclusive or elite or prestigious as you may feel.

Re: My Startup has 30 Days to Live

#184

Post by Domenic_S »

mst wrote: post #160
patio11 wrote: post #97

So, it sucks, but it happens, and it won't matter nearly as much in June 2014 as it seems to right now. Your co-founder will, hopefully, not find out about this through guessing "Is this my company?" on Twitter, but rather in hearing it from you. You may be heartbroken about it, you may cry a bit (totally OK). Then, you will put on your Responsible Adult pants, call your employee into the office, and tell them the si…

Ask yourself: who did you compete with to hire that developer? Are they still short of somebody? The one time so far in the history of Shadowcat I've had to cut people for no reason other than lack of money, I talked to managers I knew at other companies who might have an interest in the sort of talent that I was about to force onto the market. Two people finished working for me on a friday and started a new job on t…

That's really stand-up of you. Respect.

Re: My Startup has 30 Days to Live

#185

Post by sockgrant »

greghinch wrote: post #156
tptacek wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we understand that you believe businesses that don't aim for shoot-the-moon growth shouldn't call themselves "startups". The problem is, not everybody agrees with you. I've done both kinds of companies and don't think growth trajectory is the defining feature of a "startup". I'm also not particularly interested in debating the point, since it has very little to do with the story we're commenting on. (I also u…

My only point is to offer hopefully helpful advice to the legions of folks who come to HN wanting to learn how to start their own business for the first time. Many unintentionally assume they need to operate like a startup to their own peril, when in fact they could have had a successful business if not for chasing that label. Certainly no intention of being "mean-spirited". The fact that it might come off that way l…

I wouldn't listen to tptacek. I'm not sure what he's going on about.

I found your comment(s) very insightful. Thanks a lot for posting.

Re: My Startup has 30 Days to Live

#187

Post by paulrademacher »

jpdoctor wrote: post #101
ChuckMcM wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think commanding on the Battlefield is the wrong metaphor, we use it a lot but its not a battle, its a sport. When you tell your developer you can't afford to pay him any more it isn't that he (or she) "dies" its that they move on to their next job. Is it painful? Of course. But it isn't death. Sports analogies work better since there is always next season with some of the same and some different players. You decid…

> Is it painful? Of course. But it isn't death. No, but firing somebody who is the head of household and has major medical issues at home, is a helluva lot more serious than 4th down.

The head of household with major medical issues shouldn't be working at a tiny barely-funded startup.

Re: My Startup has 30 Days to Live

#188

Post by mindcrime »

greghinch wrote: post #29

I'm going to say this knowing that I may get down voted to heck. And I don't mean it as a "told you so" to the OP, but rather hopefully some cautionary advice for would-be founders. I have come to the opinion that if you are bootstrapping, you have no business calling your company a startup. You are building a small business. And there is nothing shameful about this. You are among solid companions with your local plu…

But you are not a startup.

... in the opinion of greghinch.

Sorry, but I'm of the opinion that your opinion, or at least your use of terminology, is a bit dodgy. I agree that taking VC money implies certain expectations that may not be what you - as a founder - want or are comfortable with, yes. That's just a warning against taking VC money, unless you know for sure what you're getting into. But to suggest that you aren't a "startup" unless you take VC money and do the "get big fast" thing is, IMO, totally unsupported.

Just because a company is bootstrapping does not mean they are "building a small business" or that you are meant to be companions with the "local plumbers, restaurants and barbers". Big companies can be built slowly. Did Wal-mart start off as a huge mega-corp? McDonals? IBM? A million other examples? No.

Organic growth, re-investing in the company and growing slowly but steadily can be a path to being huge just as well as grabbing a pile of VC money and trying to compress it all into a couple of years. It's all about the decisions you make and how you execute and what your vision is.

Also note that it's really not a fixed decision anyway... you could bootstrap for 6 years, then - one day - decide to take VC or private equity money to expand. So were you, or were you not a startup? Or would that be a "Schrödinger startup"?

Re: My Startup has 30 Days to Live

#189

Post by mindcrime »

enraged_camel wrote: post #133
dkrich wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And why isn't a barber shop a startup? Great Clips and Super Cuts were once new, fledgling businesses. Not charging money, taking VC investment, joining an incubator, and creating a stupid name that ends in "fy" or "ly" a startup does not make. BTW, I've read the essay. I like most of what he writes, but I have a fundamental disagreement on this one and just because it comes from the hands of PG does not make it gosp…

You are free to disagree with PG. Doing so doesn't change the fact that he is the sort of authority who gets cited in Wikipedia articles on the topic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Startup_company The term "startup" originated during the dot-com bubble. The very origin of the term means it is supposed to apply primarily to new tech companies who are designed to grow fast. A barber shop is not a startup. It is a small…

Eh, I think you're dead wrong in every way, but I upvoted you nonetheless, since your post is a legitimate part of the discussion. I just don't agree with any of it.

Re: My Startup has 30 Days to Live

#190

Post by jjmardlin »

wow, hidingmyname, if nothing else, you've inspired one of the most positive and supportive threads I've seen on HN (don't bother checking, I'm still a pseudo-noob).

I can only echo what many others have said in one way or another: be at integrity with yourself, do what you can to support your team and maintain your honour, and I believe that you will look back at this, in 6 months, with some kind of gratitude.

You lived it. :)

Post reply on HN