News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Zenefits cuts nearly 50% of workforce. Parent comment

Re:Zenefits cuts nearly 50% of workforce by staticautomatic on Thursday February 09, 2017 @01:29PM (#13609461)
An angel investor recently responded to my pitch materials by scolding me for saying that our unit economics were strong enough to make most of our revenue profit (which is true). He said it "wasn't smart" and that other investors would question whether I'd thought through our business model. Months later, I am still at a loss for words.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Zenefits cuts nearly 50% of workforce by pault on Thursday February 09, 2017 @03:03PM (#13610387)
Maybe he was implying that it should be reinvested in growth?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Zenefits cuts nearly 50% of workforce by staticautomatic on Thursday February 09, 2017 @03:42PM (#13610757)
He claimed that costs would outstrip our margins as we grew. I have to assume he just thinks this is how startups work, because most of the costs he specifically brought up don't actually exist in our market/business model. In any event, if you have an instinctively negative and suspicious reaction to profitability, then as a business person, I want nothing to do with you.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Zenefits cuts nearly 50% of workforce by rhizome on Thursday February 09, 2017 @05:44PM (#13611734)
"Nobody ever lost a funding round for using Heroku."
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Zenefits cuts nearly 50% of workforce by staticautomatic on Thursday February 09, 2017 @06:44PM (#13612099)
I don't follow. Could you explain what you meant?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Zenefits cuts nearly 50% of workforce by rhizome on Thursday February 09, 2017 @10:56PM (#13613093)
It's a play on "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM," the original FUD. It relates to that person seemingly thinking that a high run rate is de rigeur. Like IBM in the 60-70s, Heroku is among the costliest providers.
[ Parent | on HN ]