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

Etacts (YC W10) Shutting Down

etacts.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 64 posts

Re: Etacts (YC W10) Shutting Down

#41

Post by axod »

joshu wrote: post #38
angelbob wrote: post #24

That's deeply unfortunate. I loved you guys on demo day. Based on my choices, apparently I shouldn't try more angel investment. I was an investor in NewsLabs. This would have been another "yeah, let's invest" choice if they were interested (they weren't). I think I may have picked the two first to close up shop.

I didn't realize you were angel investing, Noah. Drop me a line. NewsLabs wasn't raising enough money, so I didn't even consider it. I've said it before but: don't invest in companies raising too little. They will fail.

> "I've said it before but: don't invest in companies raising too little. They will fail."

I presume that by 'they will fail', you mean that the company will fail to make your required ROI as an investor, being acquired for millions?

At first read it seems like you're saying that unless you raise a ton of money you can't build a successful profitable business...

IMHO Newslabs failed because it was a terrible idea, not because of anything else.

Re: Etacts (YC W10) Shutting Down

#44

Post by atldev »

achompas wrote: post #42

Apparently they're being bought out: http://techcrunch.com/2010/12/21/salesforce-buys-email-conta...

If they are being bought out, seems like a sloppy way to handle the communication. At a minimum it's confusing to existing users, which I assume Salesforce would like to keep.

Re: Etacts (YC W10) Shutting Down

#47

Post by Alex3917 »

gnok wrote: post #5
lincolnq wrote: post #2

I'd love a postmortem.

Agreed. They didn't seem to have issues finding investments or visibility. If this is one of those "other issues" cases, there's lots to learn from here.

Startups don't fail due to a lack of funding or visibility; that's pretty much the default.

Re: Etacts (YC W10) Shutting Down

#48

Post by joshu »

axod wrote: post #41
joshu wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't realize you were angel investing, Noah. Drop me a line. NewsLabs wasn't raising enough money, so I didn't even consider it. I've said it before but: don't invest in companies raising too little. They will fail.

> "I've said it before but: don't invest in companies raising too little. They will fail." I presume that by 'they will fail', you mean that the company will fail to make your required ROI as an investor, being acquired for millions? At first read it seems like you're saying that unless you raise a ton of money you can't build a successful profitable business... IMHO Newslabs failed because it was a terrible idea, no…

I mean that it will go out of business.

Venture backed companies raise mone because they have have some significant buildout to complete before they can got market. Raise too little and the chances of reaching that point are too small.

Additionally, if a startup cannot attract a certain amount of interest from investors, that is a big hint, too.

Note that didn't say how much that minimum is. You are making assumptions.

Bootstrapped businesses are great, too. But I am talking about a different kind of company.

Anyway, yes, the news space is dismal and I avoid it. But I never needed to get to that part of the analysis.

Re: Etacts (YC W10) Shutting Down

#49

Post by hugh3 »

atldev wrote: post #44
achompas wrote: post #42

Apparently they're being bought out: http://techcrunch.com/2010/12/21/salesforce-buys-email-conta...

If they are being bought out, seems like a sloppy way to handle the communication. At a minimum it's confusing to existing users, which I assume Salesforce would like to keep.

Doesn't Salesforce have a rather more limited target market than etacts? I've never used either product but I get the impression that Salesforce is targeted to salesmen and etacts is targeted to the general population.

Re: Etacts (YC W10) Shutting Down

#50

Post by gnok »

Alex3917 wrote: post #47
gnok wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. They didn't seem to have issues finding investments or visibility. If this is one of those "other issues" cases, there's lots to learn from here.

Startups don't fail due to a lack of funding or visibility; that's pretty much the default.

Hmm. That's interesting. I can think of many products that failed essentially because no one heard of them and not because they were too expensive. I guess I didn't think too much before applying this analogy to startups.

Could you cite some interesting examples of startup failures worth reading about?

Post reply on HN