For A Stranger In Silicon Valley, Success Isn’t Only About Who You Know
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
The tone of this article, like so many, continues to perpetuate the notion that Startup Success(TM) = Raising VC Money.
Lest we forget our past (1999-2001), it is in fact possible to build a _business_ -- that happens to be in the startup stage of life -- that actually generates revenue and, dare I say, profits. Both may be small at the outset, but perhaps enough to get the ball rolling. Maybe even enough to scale (slowly).
Then, if there's a real opportunity and you think some outside funds might help scale quicker/better, you could raise some money. If you really need it.
(And though many of these lessons will still hold true then, the process will be quite different and less of a 'game'. I assure the budding entrepreneurs out there that the old adage "Banks want to lend money to people who don't need it" holds true for VC as well.)
Sorry if this sounded that way. I didn’t in any way try to imply raising money = success. In fact raising capital pushes you to succeed faster, which in some ways is not the right strategy IMHO. You need your organic growth.
That said, with Cucumbertown the relationship with our investors have grown to such a level that money has become least of the value they have added to our startup. You essentially have people on you side who can open doors for you with an email or phone call. These investors are mostly entrepreneurs of previous era who have incredible insights and connections that spell the difference between success and failures. Cucumbertown, 4 weeks into launch has 2-3 such examples already.
Cucumbertown didn’t intend to raise funds. It happened to us serendipitously. In retrospect, that’s probably the best thing that happened to us yet from a business development perspective.
However, some startups do require upfront capital in order to succeed in the long run. One example is to come out first in a land run, where there are multiple players with funding that are actively targeting the same market (with a huge upside). Another example are markets that are winner takes all.
In these cases, it's optimal to obtain a warchest and grab as much market share as possible.
If these stories didn't provide business value, then startup founders wouldn't share this information with the press in the hope of trying to get on the radar VCs who may be interested in investing in the next round and jobseekers.
I can relate to most of it even though I don't work in the Valley. Especially the "make friends and listen to their insights" part. We are friends with a few more experienced team and everytime we talk I learn something.
for me at least, the problem isn't "too much to read", it's having a sense of the quality of an article before deciding to spend the time reading it. hence why i skim HN comments before deciding to click through.
I think that if the content is relevant then there's nothing wrong with self-promotion. I looked at the comment history and he linked to tldr in 7/10 of his last comments over the last week. That doesn't seem excessively repetitive, although a disclosure might be appropriate.