[danilocampos]

Solid analysis. I suspected as much thanks to their series on bootstrapped companies.

I say cut the crap, though. If bootstrapping is the better way, awesome – 37signals will enjoy the bathtubs full of money they get at the end of the rainbow, etc.

Life is too short to spend your time with a chip on your shoulder. Or, at least to write like you have one.

[edanm]

"If bootstrapping is the better way, awesome – 37signals will enjoy the bathtubs full of money they get at the end of the rainbow, etc"

That's the problem. 37 Signals says it's the better way, but not obviously better for the founders. You won't get rich, but the world will be better off for having a better company.

[whyleyc]

"You won't get rich"

Says who ?

Some estimates peg 37Signals as being profitable to the tune of $6 million per year. Divided equally between the 12 employees that's $500k each. Not bad for a year's work.

For more see: http://blog.jedchristiansen.com/2008/12/04/estimating-37sign...

[edanm]

But also not the kind of exit and FU money that entrepreneurs often seek.

This is just my understanding of their argument, though. Better to grow a company slowly and keep running it, than to grow a company and get bought. They think you should be in the game to keep running the company, not get rich. Getting rich while running the company is also possible, but that's a nice side-effect as far as they're concerned.

[davidw]

> Life is too short to spend your time with a chip on your shoulder. Or, at least to write like you have one.

Not if getting lots of attention is important to your business.