News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:No Exits. Liquidity Dries Up Even More For VC-Backed Star... by spolsky on Thursday October 02, 2008 @04:05PM (#322091)
Whine whine. I have an idea. Why not make a product to sell to consumers, instead of making shares to sell to the public?
Re:No Exits. Liquidity Dries Up Even More For VC-Backed Star... by wschroter on Thursday October 02, 2008 @06:59PM (#322244)
Not really the point when discussing the investor market. If companies don't have quick exits, the typical venture investor can't make their fund operate.

That said, I do believe building a company that creates value on the basis of selling a profitable product is all that matters.

Re:No Exits. Liquidity Dries Up Even More For VC-Backed Star... by alecco on Thursday October 02, 2008 @04:18PM (#322099)
Well said.

How about downscaling the size. Sites like Twitter could be done by one person and a bit for subcontracting. Sites like Facebook by a team of 10 to 15.

Too much money and too much megabuck sponsored hype. Simple micro startups are still left out even though they are more than viable.

Re:No Exits. Liquidity Dries Up Even More For VC-Backed Star... by bradgessler on Thursday October 02, 2008 @06:32PM (#322217)
Sorry but that statement is crap. I'm sure if Twitter could be done by one person, they could. These companies have a LOT more going on than just banging out code.
Re:No Exits. Liquidity Dries Up Even More For VC-Backed Star... by vaksel on Thursday October 02, 2008 @06:01PM (#322189)
I think the whole huge employee numbers are just a way for those big companies to justify to their investors their high valuations. "Oh yeah we have 700 employees, so we are a huge company, so 500 mil in VC funding is really not a lot for a huge company like us"
Re:No Exits. Liquidity Dries Up Even More For VC-Backed Star... by colinplamondon on Thursday October 02, 2008 @05:37PM (#322175)
There seems to be an almost pathological bias against profitability with a lot of startups.
Re:No Exits. Liquidity Dries Up Even More For VC-Backed Star... by sown on Thursday October 02, 2008 @11:55PM (#322408)
So I heard that some think that is because for a long while the R/D effort was outsourced to other companies, away from larger ones. I dunno if that is the case but in the company I worked for got acquired and did some pretty serious R/D. It could have been profitable but acquisition was obviously the easier way out so the investors took it.

I'm sure something like Twitter is useful but only to a large company, perhaps? I dunno.

Re:No Exits. Liquidity Dries Up Even More For VC-Backed Star... by acgourley on Thursday October 02, 2008 @05:50PM (#322184)
That's not really it, if we're going to speak in generalizations it would be more fitting to talk about the investors that favor high risk/high reward growth patterns.
Re:No Exits. Liquidity Dries Up Even More For VC-Backed Star... by mpc on Friday October 03, 2008 @12:22AM (#322423)
A site like Facebook would be impossible with just 10-15 people. Designing, implementing, and managing something on that scale is an insane amount of work. It probably takes a dozen ops/monitoring people just to keep the thing running.
Re:No Exits. Liquidity Dries Up Even More For VC-Backed Star... by alecco on Friday October 03, 2008 @03:27PM (#322972)
Only with standard corporate solutions.

a Website (httpd etc) + Web Application server (CMS/CMF) + Application Container (J2EE and all that) + RDBMS (Oracle, MySQL...)

And multiply that to development, QA, and production environments.

Yes, that way you need millions just in licenses and hosting to run even a lol-site and hundreds of employees to keep the beast working.

Re:No Exits. Liquidity Dries Up Even More For VC-Backed Star... by jamongkad on Thursday October 02, 2008 @09:59PM (#322357)
Good! now startups will be forced to restructure their business and actually find a way to make real revenue.