Live data from Hacker News

A startup doesn't need to be a unicorn

mattgiustwilliamson.substack.com

201–210 of 363 posts

Re: A startup doesn't need to be a unicorn

#201
post #84
post #8

Well yes, that's called a regular company. Not sure if I'm missing something here?

It's not a "regular" company, because it's still raising angel investment, presumably from the tech/startup ecosystem. A more common route for non-tech-startup companies is to get money via debt - in other words, borrow money from a bank or financiers. That's a different model to with different risk/reward characteristics, but it's how most non-innovative entrepreneurship is done, I believe - things like building res…

> because it's still raising angel investment, presumably from the tech/startup ecosystem.

> A more common route for non-tech-startup companies is to get money via debt - in other words, borrow money from a bank or financiers.

What do you think angel investors are if not financiers, and what do you think those investments are if not debt?

The only difference is that in the software- and software-adjacent world everyone expects a 100-fold return on their investments.

Re: A startup doesn't need to be a unicorn

#202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And open up for liability

Is this really true? I'm in the US, and have a corporation in the US. I am shielded from liability through the corporate veil, but I also have a $50/mo $2M/incidence liability umbrella. I honestly have no idea if either are necessary, in 20 years of "doing business" I've never had a single liability needing to be covered by insurance or the veil. I think it's wise to have, just in case, but even in lawsuit happy Amer…

Yes, it is true for germany. You're only somewhat shielded from liability with a GmbH/UG.

Re: A startup doesn't need to be a unicorn

#203

The company I work for is a small company that has enabled above-market results for everyone employed. Almost 20 years ago the founder saw a specific niche, and went after it aggressively, having software built out of his own savings. We've never taken a dime of outside funding (aside from PPP loan in 2020, allowing to us to lose no employees despite our income being decimated). He's very aggressive about keeping exp…

No VC company has done what valve has done. More companies should be like valve. YC is also no longer a good deal for a company which has even a little bit traction.

Re: A startup doesn't need to be a unicorn

#204

> even a relatively small deal would produce a life-changing outcome for the founding team. I run a SaaS with a business partner and this is basically our thesis for getting rich. My saying around this is "This amount of revenue/profit will cause a company of 500 or 1000 to go bankrupt, but it will make a company of 5-10 filthy rich"

This is exactly what I am doing. I started another startup in February 2024. After a year, I crossed $1M in annual profit with three employees. I am not planning to scale humans. Profits are growing, and we don't need to hire more people. LLMs and scripting automation are doing the work of approx. 20-30 people — this wasn't possible before.

Re: A startup doesn't need to be a unicorn

#205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been on here long enough to see it with every tech hype cycle in the past ~20 years. Self driving cars, VR, bitcoin, then generically 'crypto', web3, now AI/LLMs, probably a lot I'm missing right now... It's funny how the optimist control the narrative in the beginning then the pessimist start chiming in around the time the hype starts to vaporize. The AI/LLM cynicism is rising right now it seems.

I guess I have a different view on this... I feel like you left out that the past 20 years has also seen enormous success in this industry, even to a historically unprecedented degree. You listed a number of things that have been super hyped flashes in the pan that never really panned out (or in the case of self driving cars, have taken way longer to pan out than people expected), but you didn't list the things that…

> It's certainly difficult to predict which hype-y things are going to mature into sustainably large markets, and which are going to fade into obscurity, but a model of "things that are hyped are doomed" is not predictive

Perhaps this is where we differ. I offered a list of things that, granted IMO, were all hype with little substance. Or perhaps just on a timeline so long that many people got the hype timing wrong.

Your list was mostly things that were obvious winners. They were mostly building steam with real world use cases and trending hard before the buzzwords got associated with the movements (eg. Web 2.0 and saas). These were obvious enhancements to the status quo. I’m not sure they were overhyped as they did very much become the defacto standard for their time. It doesn’t mean they will hold that title for ever, but tremendous economic value falls under those umbrellas. I’d argue intrinsic value too (unlike crypto).

AI/LLM might do that in some regards. But doing it in a way that makes lasting business sense is still tbd. AI eating the world, still very much tbd. So I do think we agree on this point.

Re: A startup doesn't need to be a unicorn

#206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And open up for liability

Is this really true? I'm in the US, and have a corporation in the US. I am shielded from liability through the corporate veil, but I also have a $50/mo $2M/incidence liability umbrella. I honestly have no idea if either are necessary, in 20 years of "doing business" I've never had a single liability needing to be covered by insurance or the veil. I think it's wise to have, just in case, but even in lawsuit happy Amer…

Lawsuits are more common in Germany than the US. Possibly because the procedure is different, with lower overhead, and penalties are not reduced for reasons like: you don't have the money to pay.

I believe Germany is generally heavy on liability and light on ways to avoid it. If you damage someone's property, there may be a procedure to confirm that you damaged their property, and then you must pay the value of the damage - as well as the court fee because you didn't just pay it upon asking. No ifs or buts. You cannot avoid paying it in any way, including the clever use of paperwork to avoid paying it. That's why there's a high bar to form a GmbH. As you correctly pointed out, good insurance can also limit your effective liability. I think such business liability insurance products are very common in Germany.

After reading that, for all the talk the USA has about "personal responsibility", it doesn't seem that serious about it, does it?

I haven't been sued either, and I live in Germany. I did pay someone $100 to replace something I accidentally broke, and walked away with the broken thing. No court was involved there and I didn't bother to claim insurance.

Limited liability is something you should always want, and if it merely costs a $30 filing fee and some forms, you should get it, but it's obviously jurisdiction-specific and in Germany, with the much higher requirements, it's obvious that they really only want medium to large businesses to have it (though this isn't a direct rule, I think).

From this thread I just learned about the Unternehmergesellschaft (haftungsbeschränkt) which is apparently a GmbH that can be formed for less than $25,000, but instead, you have to set aside 25% of your profit until you have $25,000, at which point you can convert to a normal GmbH.

Re: A startup doesn't need to be a unicorn

#207
post #33

Someone investing $1M for 10% might better off buy gold or a property. It sounds good for me as a founder, but from investor point of view, this is pointless. Why taking a huge risk for 10%?

If for 1M I get 10%, the company is valued at 10M.

Going from 10M to 20M is not a big stretch, and that would net me 1M already. More than gold appreciation I believe.

Re: A startup doesn't need to be a unicorn

#208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would you consider your neighborhood restaurant a "startup". Of course, they started at one point, didn't they?

My 8-year child will be excited to know their lemonade stand is a "startup". I'll have to put that on their college application form as an achievement.

[deleted]

Re: A startup doesn't need to be a unicorn

#209
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dictionary defines startup as: "a newly established business." Your take is typical on HN, but not the common interpretation.

But then, this is HN.

Hence the hourly reminder that most people don't think like the HN crowd does.

Re: A startup doesn't need to be a unicorn

#210
post #77

Here's a model that exists in Germany, which I like: You can present a business plan to the state's investment bank and apply for several financial aides, including: * 1.5 years of universal basic income for you plus up to 2 other people. It's a tiny amount of money, but the point is to free you up to invest your actual time an money into the business. You do not have to pay this back. * up to 20k EUR in "consulting…

It's also connected to so much bureaucracy that you almost need to hire someone for that alone, because you wont have as much time for your actual business. Founding a company in Germany is so much unnecessary paperwork its crazy. Single handedly the only reason I will never try it in my home country.

I have founded multiple companies in Germany and in the US. Sure, in the US you have services like Stripe Atlas that make it a bit easier. But still, I would not say it's much crazier registering a company in Germany compared to the US.

Of course, it helps if you have a bit of an idea of legal concepts and accounting, but to be honest, that also makes sense, since you are starting a business.

This is not to say that we should not work to make it less bureaucratic in Germany (and other countries).

I agree that applying to loan and grant programs within Germany, and especially EU, are a super pain in the ass. I definitely see some potential there.

Post reply on HN