zlacker

> Reddit's last round valued them at $500 million

> That's a successful company by any standard.

Simply being "valued" at some dollar amount doesn't actually mean success. Revenue and positive net profit mean success...

>>Alupis+(OP)
What if Reddit is around for 50 years, paying dozens of employees the whole time while never making a net profit. Would that not be a successful company to essentially everyone? (except the investors)

>>Reedx+i6
If all your business does it extract money from investors and deposit it into employee's pockets (and never generates self sustaining revenue, let alone turn profits), I think we'd call that a charity, more than anything.

>>Reedx+i6
No. That would be a very unsuccessful company.

>>Alupis+Tb
Yeah, I should have been clearer - the assumption is that it would have self sustaining revenue at some point (I can't imagine many investors would keep putting $ into it after 50 years). It would just be a break even business.

That's why I would say it's a success to everyone but the investors who never got their payday.

>>Reedx+Cn
> That's why I would say it's a success to everyone but the investors who never got their payday.

Yes, so it would not be a successful venture backed company. Lifestyle businesses are fine if you pay for them. When someone else invests and expects a return you need to provide a return to be successful.