Insanity? Why A Bootstrap Entrepreneur Raised $17 Million in Venture Funding

Sorry it was not clear in the article, but here's the basic decision:

1. Have a large percentage of a modestly-sized pie

2. Have a smaller piece of a very large pie

Of course, there's always the "large percentage of large pie" option, but that seems to be pretty rare.

I've done Option #1 already and wanted to take a shot at Option #2. It's really early in the process, but there's enough reason to be hopeful.

Apologies if the article came off as boastful. I didn't know how to say it any other way without compromising truthfulness and making my larger point -- i.e. the VC game is a tough game unless you've got some leverage, and most entrepreneurs are better off working on the business in the early stages.

I don't think it's boasting but rather trying to explain away an apparent contradiction.

I spose there are differences between 'pure' bootstrapping and raising 17m but saying you're still bootstrapping. Firstly,this guy has experience 'truly' bootstrapping, so I see no reason do doubt his word, but if this is your first try and you raise money promising to bootstrap, you may still end up with wildly different spending patterns to a true bootstrapper. Secondly, they will have given up a lot of equity, and perhaps board seats, for all that money, unlike a true bootstrapper; that shift in control dynamics may, again, be a significant difference. So don't assume that this article means big money'll make no negative difference to how a business is run if you 'say' you're going to stick to bootstrapping, versus the true bootstrapping route. (it may well be that the positives outweigh the negatives)