[xavxav]

Sure, but as I'm sure you're aware, the current system makes this model impossible for all but the most niche products: a faster growing, better funded (because they are growing faster) product will outspend you until you die. The existing VC model is hostile to 'slow growth' companies and products.

[cardamomo]

Then change the model!

I see the value in your point--it reflects our current reality--but we should never lose sight of the fact that we can replace systems that don't serve our best interests. Yes, it takes hard work, but maintaining the status quo is not the only way forward.

[infinitezest]

I mean fair enough but isn't that the problem? That people would like to change the system but the exact mechanism for doing so is not at all obvious.

[falcolas]

Based on the earlier comments, it feels like step 1 is to renegotiate salaries away from stock. It makes sense when you can't afford reasonable salaries, but it's not something that's been written in stone.

Also, don't hire executives who have a demonstrated history of making bad decisions for a business' long term stability in the name of "shareholder value".

[maccolgan]

The other problem is the insane attrition and low tenure rates that directly disincentivizes any investment in individuals.

[johnfn]

No, not really. If you change the model you’ll immediately be out-competed by anyone who didn’t change the model.

[dgb23]

It's not impossible in a real sense. Many SMBs do this, large players do it somewhat sometimes in some areas and have proven this strategy to work on some level. I want _more_ of that and I think it would be better for pretty much everyone in the long term.

My comment above isn't nearly as nuanced as it could be - I'm pressuring a pain point that I think needs more attention. But I'm optimistic, It seems like sustainability awareness and long term, holistic / system thinking is growing.