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

The quiet death of Ello's big dreams

waxy.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 264 posts

Re: The quiet death of Ello's big dreams

#191

Post by DeathArrow »

FormerBandmate wrote: post #153
sirspacey wrote: post #132

Excellent, balanced post. We’re at the end of a grand experiment of “you can take VC money and deliver a tech with new values, one that people want.” The only people still claiming you can just haven’t run out of their last funding round… yet. We have 20 years of evidence on what tech businesses can be built on the Internet that make money. It’s narrow and mostly can’t solve the problems that remain. The escape hatch…

YouTube and Hulu did it very successfully. Twitter has just done it in a really stupid way, because their management values politics over the actual business of running a social media platform (moreso now than before, but still very much before)

X switches to subscription exactly because politics forces them to, by trying to scare and shame advertisers.

Once subscription revenue is enough, scare and shame won't work and politics won't have anything to do with the future of the business.

Re: The quiet death of Ello's big dreams

#192

Post by DeathArrow »

sirspacey wrote: post #132

Excellent, balanced post. We’re at the end of a grand experiment of “you can take VC money and deliver a tech with new values, one that people want.” The only people still claiming you can just haven’t run out of their last funding round… yet. We have 20 years of evidence on what tech businesses can be built on the Internet that make money. It’s narrow and mostly can’t solve the problems that remain. The escape hatch…

>The secret is out now that, mostly, founders make the same amount of money in the same amount of time whether they go the VC or bootstrapped route (when it’s a winning business).

I pretty much doubt it is the same amount of time. And I doubt the same percent of businesses survive nevermind win.

Re: The quiet death of Ello's big dreams

#193

Post by DeathArrow »

sirspacey wrote: post #132

Excellent, balanced post. We’re at the end of a grand experiment of “you can take VC money and deliver a tech with new values, one that people want.” The only people still claiming you can just haven’t run out of their last funding round… yet. We have 20 years of evidence on what tech businesses can be built on the Internet that make money. It’s narrow and mostly can’t solve the problems that remain. The escape hatch…

>But if you are a founder that cares about anything - anything - the route that gets you there is founder control, patience, and a customer base that pays.

Most successful founders, from Edison to Gates and Bezos went in the business to make money, not to change the world. Changing the world for better or for worse is mostly a side effect.

The goal of a business is profit, not ideology.

Re: The quiet death of Ello's big dreams

#194

Post by throwuxiytayq »

DeathArrow wrote: post #189

The article somehow states that money from private equity and venture capital is poison that will kill new companies and harm the public. I wonder how you can grow a company without outside investors? Either you are a very rich founder or you can try to grow it organically but very slowly. If you attempt to do the later you'll find yourself in a position where is very hard to succeed, moreso if your company doesn't d…

> I wonder how you can grow a company without outside investors? Either you are a very rich founder or you can try to grow it organically but very slowly. If you attempt to do the later you'll find yourself in a position where is very hard to succeed, moreso if your company doesn't do anything new and the competition has lots of cash to succeed.

Hard is fine. The point is, taking VC money makes building the company (you wanted to build) straight up impossible.

Turns out building companies is very difficult. If the first thing you do is sell out, perhaps you don’t have what it takes.

Re: The quiet death of Ello's big dreams

#195

Post by DeathArrow »

So they had 7 people to pay, and also pay for hosting, rent, equipment and utilities. That means at least 1 million per year.

How were they going to do it without outside funding if the creators subscribing weren't paying at least that amount? Ask for donations on Patreon?

Re: The quiet death of Ello's big dreams

#196

Post by DeathArrow »

bko wrote: post #170
sirspacey wrote: post #132

Excellent, balanced post. We’re at the end of a grand experiment of “you can take VC money and deliver a tech with new values, one that people want.” The only people still claiming you can just haven’t run out of their last funding round… yet. We have 20 years of evidence on what tech businesses can be built on the Internet that make money. It’s narrow and mostly can’t solve the problems that remain. The escape hatch…

Why can't you take VC money and run the business the way you want? They can't force you to do anything. Sure they can pressure you, but if you have ownership and they have a minority stake, you can do what you want. Ello could have stopped at any time. Why did they raise 5 million only 6 months after their first round and another 5 million 6 months after that? What were they spending their money on? I don't see how t…

>X showed that you can fire ~80% of your employees and the product could still exist.

Most fired employees weren't producing profit. Most were censoring, making politics or concerned themselves with corporate bureaucracy, drawing charts and making presentations.

Re: The quiet death of Ello's big dreams

#197

Post by moomin »

DeathArrow wrote: post #193
sirspacey wrote: post #132

Excellent, balanced post. We’re at the end of a grand experiment of “you can take VC money and deliver a tech with new values, one that people want.” The only people still claiming you can just haven’t run out of their last funding round… yet. We have 20 years of evidence on what tech businesses can be built on the Internet that make money. It’s narrow and mostly can’t solve the problems that remain. The escape hatch…

>But if you are a founder that cares about anything - anything - the route that gets you there is founder control, patience, and a customer base that pays. Most successful founders, from Edison to Gates and Bezos went in the business to make money, not to change the world. Changing the world for better or for worse is mostly a side effect. The goal of a business is profit, not ideology.

You’re all over this thread but I think you need to read it a bit more carefully. There’s no reference to any belief system in the post you’re replying to, there’s an assertion about expected profit and control.

You can disagree with that assertion, and indeed have on another thread, but within the context of the assertion the poster is correct.

I think you’re wrong to even think this is about “ideology”, which is presumably a set of beliefs you are against. It applies as much to _variance_, which 100% is something a founder should care about.

Re: The quiet death of Ello's big dreams

#198

Post by DeathArrow »

bko wrote: post #170
sirspacey wrote: post #132

Excellent, balanced post. We’re at the end of a grand experiment of “you can take VC money and deliver a tech with new values, one that people want.” The only people still claiming you can just haven’t run out of their last funding round… yet. We have 20 years of evidence on what tech businesses can be built on the Internet that make money. It’s narrow and mostly can’t solve the problems that remain. The escape hatch…

Why can't you take VC money and run the business the way you want? They can't force you to do anything. Sure they can pressure you, but if you have ownership and they have a minority stake, you can do what you want. Ello could have stopped at any time. Why did they raise 5 million only 6 months after their first round and another 5 million 6 months after that? What were they spending their money on? I don't see how t…

>Maybe if Ello had raised only a few million and kept around a dozen employees or so, it could have succeeded.

I doubt it. It seems like a poor product market fit. I think there aren't a lot of creators willing to pay to have a small social network just for them. They won't probably be active users even if the small social network was completely free.

Re: The quiet death of Ello's big dreams

#199

Post by DeathArrow »

bruce511 wrote: post #173
bko wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't you take VC money and run the business the way you want? They can't force you to do anything. Sure they can pressure you, but if you have ownership and they have a minority stake, you can do what you want. Ello could have stopped at any time. Why did they raise 5 million only 6 months after their first round and another 5 million 6 months after that? What were they spending their money on? I don't see how t…

>> Why can't you take VC money and run the business the way you want? Because taking VC money let's you defer the revenue question. And by deferring it, you then have to bait-and-switch the users. Let me be clear. It's OK to get startup money. Businesses need capital to get going. But revenue should be the original business plan. In other words, who is paying for this site, and how? Ello ruled out advertising and dat…

But depending on agreement, founders can have much more voting power than investors, regardless of shares they hold.

Re: The quiet death of Ello's big dreams

#200

Post by DeathArrow »

bruce511 wrote: post #173
bko wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't you take VC money and run the business the way you want? They can't force you to do anything. Sure they can pressure you, but if you have ownership and they have a minority stake, you can do what you want. Ello could have stopped at any time. Why did they raise 5 million only 6 months after their first round and another 5 million 6 months after that? What were they spending their money on? I don't see how t…

>> Why can't you take VC money and run the business the way you want? Because taking VC money let's you defer the revenue question. And by deferring it, you then have to bait-and-switch the users. Let me be clear. It's OK to get startup money. Businesses need capital to get going. But revenue should be the original business plan. In other words, who is paying for this site, and how? Ello ruled out advertising and dat…

>If you want to build a business on principles, not profit, you HAVE to answer the revenue question first.

From Wikipedia:

"Business is the practice of making one's living or making money by producing or buying and selling products (such as goods and services)."

Post reply on HN