[janoc]

That article seems to harp on the fact that it is "not-com bubble", basically that the companies are getting punished because they are not "pure tech/software companies". Quite a way to miss the point, IMO.

As if delivering pure software was a sign that the company is worth investing in. Just look at all the cryptocurrency/blockchain startups from about two years ago. Most of them literally didn't have anything else but a whitepaper and some hacked up "coin" - a derivative of the open source Ethereum code. And 99.9% of them has gone bust already, disappearing with all the investor's money.

This is about investors finally wising up that a start-up with no path to profitability is not a viable business, regardless of the explosive growth fueled by cheap VC dollars and undercutting the competition ("disrupting the market") by ignoring existing laws (Uber, ...).

At least not for public investors - it is still immensely profitable for the founders and early investors of those "unicorns".

However, their goal is not to make a profitable company but to grow fast, attract a lot of VC money and then recoup the investment in an inflated IPO when the entire Potemkin village gets sold off to a lot of naive suckers who end up footing the bill once the house of cards finally collapses.

This is what needs to called out, not some BS talk about "not-com" bubbles.

[wool_gather]

> This is about investors finally wising up

Well, this generation of investors, at least. ;) We had much the same thing happening 20 years ago, and I have no doubt that we will again.