News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:An acquisition is always a failure by niggler on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @12:04AM (#5484151)
This. Many people go into startups just for the profit motive, but I firmly believe that you should start a startup because it is something you want to do or because a side project became too large to continue as a side project (forced to do)
Re:An acquisition is always a failure by sliverstorm on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @12:05AM (#5484160)
I feel like HN's focus has changed in that regard. Call me crazy, but I feel like it was less "get-rich" focused a couple years ago.
Re:An acquisition is always a failure by mindcrime on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @12:46AM (#5484288)
I feel like HN's focus has changed in that regard. Call me crazy, but I feel like it was less "get-rich" focused a couple years ago.

I dunno... considering that HN was originally "startup news" and that it's run by a company that funds / incubates startups, there's pretty much always been a certain segment of posters who are very into the financial side of things.

What gets me is the people who come along and (seemingly) present this viewpoint that "making money is evil" or "wanting to be rich is a Bad Thing". I don't get it and probably never will. As long as you play by the rules, behave ethically, and are honest, I see no problem with becoming as rich as (you can | you want). What's wrong with, say, wanting to have "fuck you money" so you don't have to live the rest of your life under the thumb of a boss, or worrying about how to pay for repairs if your car breaks down, or what to do if sudden medical expenses arise, etc? Even more so if you build a company, create jobs, and improve the standard of living for others along the way. To me, it's the greatest thing in the world.

Re:An acquisition is always a failure by integraton on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @12:55AM (#5484319)
There's nothing wrong with making money. The problem is that most tech companies focused from inception on high growth never earn their founders or employees anything remotely resembling "fuck you money."

If you want "fuck you money," go into finance. If you want "fuck you money" and still want to be an entrepreneur, start a financial services or legal firm in one of the many niches in the financial industry. And if you want "fuck you money" and you want to create jobs, tech is probably one of the worst fields to be operating in.

Re:An acquisition is always a failure by derefr on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @01:14AM (#5484364)
What if you've been doing software development, by all rights, since you were 10--it's in your bones and blood, as much as the feeling of wanting to be an entrepreneur is--but you would also like some fuck-you money anyway?

Is the answer, perhaps, "start a SaaS financial services firm"? ;)

Re:An acquisition is always a failure by integraton on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @01:21AM (#5484386)
Sure, but in that case you've decided to take a path that is less likely to get you "fuck you money," which means you must have overriding goals. This is assuming you are making rational, informed career decisions.
Re:An acquisition is always a failure by sliverstorm on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @01:02AM (#5484333)
Absolutely nothing wrong with being rich. It's about goals.

When you learn to ride a motorcycle, there is a phrase: "Look where you want to go". At least to me, it seems like when you are looking only at your exit, you might make that exit, but you won't really make much else of value along the way.

In other words, when your goal is not to build a sustainable, profitable company with lasting value, but rather just to get out as fast as possible with as much money as possible... just how far away is such a person from "scam artist"?

Re:An acquisition is always a failure by mindcrime on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @10:51AM (#5486379)
In other words, when your goal is not to build a sustainable, profitable company with lasting value, but rather just to get out as fast as possible with as much money as possible... just how far away is such a person from "scam artist"?

Sure, I don't disagree with any of that. I mean, wanting to have "fuck you money" does not necessarily imply that you're only interested in the exit, or that you want to "just get out as fast as possible with as much money as possible". There's some middle ground there.

Re:An acquisition is always a failure by niggler on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @12:55AM (#5484314)
'As long as you play by the rules, behave ethically, and are honest, I see no problem with becoming as rich as (you can | you want).'

The rules are questionable at best and we've seen many startups (including some that are funded by YC) act in a manner that some would not consider ethical (I'm reminded of InstallMonetizer https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5092711 -- I think a made a few comments there). That suggests people are it in just for the money, which makes the situation worse for the rest of us who are doing startups for something more.

Re:An acquisition is always a failure by jmorton on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @08:02AM (#5485510)
Maybe, maybe not. This essay was published almost ten years ago...

"Wealth is what you want, not money. But if wealth is the important thing, why does everyone talk about making money? It is a kind of shorthand: money is a way of moving wealth, and in practice they are usually interchangeable. But they are not the same thing, and unless you plan to get rich by counterfeiting, talking about making money can make it harder to understand how to make money." http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html

Re:An acquisition is always a failure by niggler on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @12:08AM (#5484173)
"I feel like HN's focus has changed in that regard"

I think that people started smelling easy money and rushed in. I hope to see a shakeout soon, not because I want to see others fail but because perpetuating the status quo damages the ecosystem and harkens back to 1999

Re:An acquisition is always a failure by jacquesm on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @01:39AM (#5484456)
> Many people go into startups just for the profit motive

Do you feel that increases or decreases their chances of success?

Re:An acquisition is always a failure by niggler on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @01:44AM (#5484477)
The profit motive drives a very short-term hyper-growth mentality, and the decisions reflect that nature (abrupt axing of free service tier or price hikes to show "revenue growth", engaging in questionable accounting practices, etc), which increases success if you define success as cashing out.

If you define success in terms of longevity, given that certain practices essential for long-term survival run counter to the goal of fast growth and high valuations, the profit motive decreases chances of success.

Re:An acquisition is always a failure by jacquesm on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @01:48AM (#5484491)
> the profit motive decreases chances of success.

Agreed. I think it works that way because if profit is your motive you will run your start-up focusing on the wrong goal, which is to increase your bank account instead of to increase your users satisfaction or the quality of your product. By focusing on a second order goal you will likely lose track of what really matters. But if you focus on what does really matter your second order goal will be achieved as a by-product.

I do believe that you can achieve higher profits by tweaking an existing, successful model. But to achieve high profits by going for the money directly only works well for those that are either in finance or direct derivatives of finance (such as bank robbers, who after all have the most direct line between 'profits' and their actions ;) ).

Re:An acquisition is always a failure by mindcrime on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @12:12AM (#5484187)
but I firmly believe that you should start a startup because it is something you want to do

There's no reason it can't be that and a desire to become wealthy, ya know...

Re:An acquisition is always a failure by niggler on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @12:21AM (#5484219)
"There's no reason it can't be that and a desire to become wealthy, ya know..."

I take the (apparently quaint) view that you should make money because your product/service provides real value to others. And that if you do provide real value then there's a monetization pathway (by charging those people that you do provide value to).

Re:An acquisition is always a failure by mindcrime on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @12:41AM (#5484270)
I take the (apparently quaint) view that you should make money because your product/service provides real value to others. And that if you do provide real value then there's a monetization pathway (by charging those people that you do provide value to).

I have to admit, I don't see the connection between that and the blurb you quoted above. I certainly don't disagree with the idea of providing real value, nor with the idea of charging people that you provide value to. In fact, I very recently wrote a rant[1] expressing very much that opinion. So I'm not sure what exactly it is you think we disagree about, if anything.

I'm just saying that launching a startup can be based in both a desire to "do something you enjoy" AND a desire to become wealthy. Exactly which "monetization strategy" you employ is, IMO, up to the founder(s) based on: their goals, market conditions, business circumstances, life circumstances, and probably a bazillion other things.

[1]: http://fogbeam.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-point-of-startup-is-...

Re:An acquisition is always a failure by niggler on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @12:47AM (#5484290)
I think we disagree on the extent to which "desire to become wealthy" should be a driving factor. I think the state where founders are primary driven by short-term wealth is not appropriate (it is easier to be wealthier in other areas like finance), whereas I take your comments to suggest that you think it's acceptable for making money to be the primary motivation. The views aren't mutually exclusive (timing factors, etc)
Re:An acquisition is always a failure by mindcrime on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @10:57AM (#5486425)
I think we disagree on the extent to which "desire to become wealthy" should be a driving factor. I think the state where founders are primary driven by short-term wealth is not appropriate (it is easier to be wealthier in other areas like finance), whereas I take your comments to suggest that you think it's acceptable for making money to be the primary motivation.

Aah, gotcha. Well, we may not disagree that much after all. I am not saying that "desire to be wealthy" should be a big driving factor, I'm just OK with the idea that it might be. And, more to the point, going back to my original comment that prompted all this, I'm saying that it's OK to "take the money" (that is, take an acquisition) if you need a large sum of money, at a point-in-time, and that's the best route to get it. The reasons you might want to do that are very varied, personal and subjective, and I don't think any of us have the right to judge somebody who makes that decision.

As far as what I find "acceptable", you should understand... I'm a libertarian who finds everything "acceptable" as long as it doesn't involve initiation of force or fraud. But finding something "acceptable" is not the same thing as finding it "desirable" or "good". And since I have no standing to judge someone else's decisions, it doesn't really matter what I think about their motivations, goals, desires, etc.

Re:An acquisition is always a failure by eli_gottlieb on Wednesday April 03, 2013 @08:34AM (#5485607)
I thought everyone knew that the expected value of a start-up is positive but small?