zlacker

>>waxpan+(OP)
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 is always subscription revenue.

It’s true you can build a unique business on unique values for a unique community.

But it’s a long slog in the MicroSaaS world where anyone can & many will straight up copy you - forever.

X.com is probably the only & last experiment on whether switching to subscription rev is achievable at scale. Looks pretty clear so far that it’s not.

This might seem a negative outlook, but it could be quite positive if founders know & accept it.

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).

There will always be opportunities for finance-backed cartel-busting mega runs.

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.

>>sirspa+9s1
>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.

>>DeathA+pj2
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.

>>moomin+yk2
The post I replied to, was talking about founders that care about anything. As opposed to founders that do not care and are in it just for the money.

That's how I read it and you have the right to disagree. That's why we are on a discussion forum. To share ideas and speak our minds freely, regardless if we agree or not.

I hope you have fun tracking and counting my posts and it represents a good spending of your time.