|
|
|
|
|
|
by autoexec
865 days ago
|
|
|
I hope you're wrong, but perhaps you're not and instead of "make something useful and/or new for people" startups just want to make something threatening enough to be destroyed or at best scraped for parts by a larger company so long as they get a payout. |
|
|
Getting bought out or IPO'ing on stock market are generally best options, especially with the uncertainty of the next 10 years, which then allows you to be able to essentially stop working for a period of time.
Otherwise the game is you can fall behind developing features, where heavily funded startups simply copy everything you've spent years designing, catching up by cutting their time and effort down since feature sets have already been curated down to a model that works, and you either find a way to survive or competitors take your clients.
Those heavily funded startups who can always outcompete what a stable and long-term business will be willing or able to pay - subsidized by the VC industrial complex, as an additional way to kill competition - on the micro level but also on the macro level - making VC funded companies more likely to succeed overall; even if it's sucking talent away from good or more worthwhile efforts - and also at the expense of the general population, as the VC industrial complex also requires higher fees to be charged; it's inflammatory-inflationary.
There's also the acquihire model in regards to consolidation, which overall doesn't seem good for the consumer but can give a good payout.