[ok_dad]

> Ah for fuck's sake.

I agree, and I wish we had more power in these things than just forking. Now that I know Bitwarden took VC money, I'm also fucking out of this mess, and here I was about to renew for the 5th year in a row.

Fuck VC's, they ruin everything good. Can I say that here? It's true.

[secabeen]

The entire finance industry has a disdain for "lifestyle businesses", that just generate enough profits for the founders and employees to live on, but will never generate an exit beyond that. I get why, but for utility products, a solid lifestyle for the employees and a useful product for users is enough, and should be enough.

[jrochkind1]

And can be enough if you don't need large quantities of investment capital. If you don't _need_ it, but _want_ it to get fabulously wealthy... well, "lifestyle business" is not the path to that, by definition.

It's almost like the interests of those who want to get fabulously wealthy -- whether founders or investors -- become misaligned with the interests of the users, even steeper/faster than when you "just" have a "lifestyle business".

[jjeaff]

The thing is, founders can get fabulously wealthy with a lifestyle business or at least very wealthy, but it might take longer. But all the established money seeking rent parked at VC firms can't get a cut if you don't play ball with them.

[jrochkind1]

Yeah, wealthy enough if not billionaire, true.

> But all the established money seeking rent parked at VC firms can't get a cut if you don't play ball with them.

OK, but why does a founder care about that? Either they think their business model can't get them to a sustainable lifestyle business without external capital investment... or they want to get more-than-lifestyle-business wealthy, right?

[jjeaff]

I'm sure that's what they think. I don't know if the data really indicates that going to VC route will make you richer. It could certainly make you more publicly successful.

[sirsinsalot]

Millions, even tens of millions, for founders isn't unheard of at all for small "lifestyle" businesses.

Not VC billions, but fuck you money is certainly doable.

[jrochkind1]

I don't know if a couple million is "fuck you" money in 2023 (enough to never work again and eventually retire while living a fairly luxurious lifestyle?), but point taken.

[sirsinsalot]

If you can't say "fuck you" with a couple million in the bank, tax paid, in 2023 then you're living WAY outside your means.

[tunesmith]

Lifestyle businesses have a big flaw in American culture though; our safety net is not enough to make "meets expenses" a tenable long-term approach. We basically have to aim for a big wad of savings for later in life, which incentivizes going for exits and cash-outs.

[TedDoesntTalk]

VueScan (hamrick.com) is a very good example of a successful lifestyle business (first release in 1998). The founder and his son work on the product full-time. I don't think they have any other staff, but I could be wrong.

[nightski]

Seeing as only a few % of Americans achieve what you are saying I don’t think it’s strictly true. Maybe if you want to fatfire or something

[secabeen]

Perhaps, I would hope that a sustainable lifestyle business would be able to pay employees and founders enough to build a comfortable retirement nest egg through savings, investments, and compound interest.

[fortuna86]

This also means creation of billion dollar global platforms that Europe and other parts of the world have never accomplished. Trade offs.

[ok_dad]

I feel so happy that we have created "billion dollar global platforms" instead of universal healthcare or ensuring everyone was sleeping indoors. Woo-hoo!

[fortuna86]

Are you implying that there are no homeless people in Europe? Or problems with poverty or access to healthcare?

[karaterobot]

You can definitely say that here. To me the problem isn't exactly VCs, it's the expectation of rapid, open-ended growth that ruins good products and companies. Of course, the driver for that is often VCs, but it can come from other places too.