We don't want investors, actually - we don't need 'em. We do, however, want to sell this thing one day, as you can only stare at the sun for so long before going blind. Until then, however, it's fail all the way.
And yes, I'm bitter. Amazingly so. Largely with my own naïvety. But the mask is strong.
-
[EDIT:] I wrote this comment first, but following the journalist's response also asking for your email am adding these edits.
1. I would consider giving the journalist your email as well (or email him) as having a story written about you can't hurt -- maybe someone will read about your metrics there and want to invest. You explicitly complain about this in "Support from family and friends, investor backing, media coverage". Now, here's your chance. The journalist has a profile reading "Columnist @ Slate. Contributor @ Priceonomics. Co-host of the Stratechery Podcast (stratechery.fm) with Ben Thompson (currently on hold; please stay tuned)."
2. On the other hand you may be wanting to keep a clear separation from this online identity, which I would respect but the journalist would have to prove through showing you other stories they have written that don't divulge the source.
You can give me a pseudonymous email, it's fine.
When I say I am "inclined to be sympathetic," I mean it. I have a very simple agenda here: I think the media, overall, give too much attention to certain tropes of "success" and "failure" stories w/r/t startups. In this person's story, I am intrigued to see that he's built an economically successful business at which he feels trapped. You don't see that kind of story every day, but I suspect it's not entirely uncommon. At the very least, it's worth exploring. Maybe a story comes out of that chat, and maybe it doesn't. My goal would be to have a friendly chat, and to see where that takes us.
If he'd need to talk to me under condition of anonymity, that's totally fine. If he's willing to go on the record, also fine. And if he decides he doesn't want to talk to me at all, hey, totally cool. I would respect any of those choices out of ethical integrity, professional code of conduct, and sympathy for his predicament.
As for me: I use my real name on this account. That means both that my journalistic output is easily searchable, and that I'm holding myself openly accountable to anyone I engage with on HN.
No pressure intended, either way.
My contact info is in my profile. Hit me up if you're ever interested in having a conversation with a writer who is inclined to be sympathetic to your dilemma. Not sure if you're media-averse at this point or not, but I'd love to explore your story for my column.
Why do you need to remain involved day to day?
Your parent commenter is bitter about the fact that a total lack of viability - making money - gets support, while he has to bootstrap in the face of derision.
madaxe_again: I recommend you get off of HN if you are interested in building a real business. This is a community for building things that investors here would be interested in. If it's not a problem that a rich man with nothing to do all day but look at Internet metrics can see as something to solve, then building a business is not going to get any support from this specific community.
You should forget about investors. When has an investor ever backed anything that they couldn't have related to within 15 seconds of hearing a pitch for it? But investors don't represent the people of the world.
If you want investment, play with investors. They'll give you $200,000 to stop making money and make a messaging app. If you launch one before you talk with them they'll raise that to $600,000.
It is what it is. (Don't read my comment bitterly. I love this ecosystem.)