Here's something I've always been confused about. How does employee headcount get factored into an acquisition or public offering? Why is having so many more employees than needed a "good thing" in these situations?
The poster is a bit making fun of this mindset; more employees isn't obviously better. But the "growth at all costs" mindset is real, and in that worldview rapid growth is a sign of success because you're building capacity to capture the market.
In reality the plan is everything because without a great plan more people means just more burn, and hitting the wall sooner.
- The technology asset is worth $3-5M, no matter what it is.
- Higher AWS bill = better product.
- EBITDA is not important, you can ignore that.
- What's the QoQ revenue growth for the last 8 quarters? Doesn't matter if margins are going down. Only revenue growth matters.
- More employees = better company. Obviously.
- Valuation should be directly proportional to venture capital raised.
- You have a remote engineering team in the US? Why not go offshore or nearshore?
- Make sure it's an asset deal, not a stock deal, so that you can write it off but the founders get double-taxed.
- Design earnouts such that they are unachievable.