The downside of nirvana's approach is when you build a solid self-funded business, doubling year over year for half a decade, then VC shows up having decided yours is an underfunded sector.

They'll pile hundreds of millions into dozens of "corporate" startups, most of whom hit the ground running after market share through predatory pricing, consequently destroying the sector.

Meanwhile, you'll find yourself unable to capture those VC dollars yourself because the VC model needs hockey stick successes to make up for the companies that go bust (recent stat here claimed 9 of 10 tech crunch startups are gone a year later). A startup can promise a hockey stick, but you have a history. Because of your solid 5 years of "just" doubling while remaining cash flow positive in an extraordinarily competitive arena, you're not providing that hockey stick.

And when that funding boom happens, and you're faced with multiple hundred million dollar pocket "startup" competitors each with 2 - 3 years of ability to sell at a loss before their inevitable rollup or death, and without deep pockets yourself despite seven figures of revenue, you're in for a few years of serious hurt. You have to execute flawlessly, not a single misstep, just to survive.