Hacker News Reader

Comment by laurent123456 | Hacker News Reader

> $6.5M

I'm probably missing something, but it seems insane they need so much money to make (yet another) API testing client.

And I'm guessing it means the company is valued at x billion dollars

They're not "making an API testing client". They're trying to start something called a "business". People do this to try to get enough of this thing called "money", to pay for the costs in their lives and their family's lives.

If they are based in America, they would be calculating at least, say $200k per year per employee, since they need to pay healthcare etc. So multiply that by the number of employees you want in your business, then add all the other costs, and extend over the period you want the funding to cover.

Nice, thanks for sharing your wisdom. And still insane they need that much money, we all have examples here of businesses that succeeded without having to raise millions of dollars

Ok, but I guess httpie are raising money in an environment where investors are wanting to invest a lot of money, and they thought "why not, it will raise lots of exciting possibilities for the business". So I'm still not getting why there's so much criticism from people in this thread. You'd probably have done the same in their situation.

Yeah, but normally taking money from investors means they want growth and a return on their investment which often skews business decisions to get quick money at some point. This often leads to an enshittified product. It seems unrealistic to make millions of dollars in short time in return for a simple product that already exists in many variants even for free. So people believe the product will suffer which makes the users suffer.

> Yeah, but normally taking money from investors [...] often skews business decisions [...] This often leads to an enshittified product.

Wow, I'm glad we've got you here to point out that the startup model doesn't work!

I don't understand why this thread on HTTPie has led to so much low quality teenagerish anti-commercial rhetoric; this is far below normal HN standards.

> Wow, I'm glad we've got you here to point out that the startup model doesn't work!

You asked why there is so much criticism to them taking so much investor money and I tried to explain. I don't understand why you react snarky.

I would also argue many comments are not anti-commercial but anti greed.

I reacted snarkily because you appeared to be giving a one-sentence criticism of the entire model of startup investment. Doesn't that seem much too large a topic, and too well-established an aspect of modern economies, to dismiss in such a shallow manner?

Is it greedy to accept large amounts of money that an investor offers you? It had never occurred to me to think of it that way. I think of it as being fortunate to be in a position where someone says "I'll give you lots of funding to start a software company". That sounds to me like an exciting opportunity that's definitely worth taking, but apparently you think it's greed?

> "I'll give you lots of funding to start a software company

But in this case there was a mildly successful company that didn't seem to need that much money to fulfill their business plan. That is the direction I was aiming at. So they took more than they needed (greed) but didn't get it for free, but with expectations from investors that might not align with the original companies goals.

My critique went into the direction of taking more money than your plan needs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com