Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by apgwoz 356 days ago
> It's like landing on Free Parking in Monopoly.

I have no clue what you’re trying to convey with this analogy? “Free Parking” is different in virtually every household.

1 comments

I was not thinking about random house rules in the analogy.
Standard rules free parking is a no-op; you get nothing and pay nothing. It just prolongs the inevitable.
Yes, that's what I was referring to.
But then this analogy doesn’t hold… Has there ever been a startup in history where it’s break even everywhere? Investors don’t get their money back, customers (hopefully!) are made whole, and the founders and employees are now out of a job and _perhaps_ didn’t get their final pay check depending on how bad it is.
Yeah, you're missing my point. Given most startups fail, the question isn't "at the end of the day do you still get a paycheck for your failed startup", it's "how much of your life did you burn on that failed startup".

Since we're talking about a specific startup whose founders are participants here, I think we can do without the ghoulish stuff about them not making payroll or whatever; "winding down" implies they're failing in an orderly way.

I got your point (after the Free Parking clarification).

(To be clear, my comment wasn’t on Double specifically. No clue how strapped for cash they are while winding down. They seem to be doing right be people (paying fees and such), and that’s great.)

Finally, maybe it’s unintentional, but you seem to be implying that “it’s not worth burning your life on a failed startup,” which seems like a bad take.

If you spend 5 years on a startup that shows promise but ultimately doesn’t pan out, is that always worse than spending 6 months on a startup that fails fast? First, this would be wildly hard to prove, and second, there are obviously counter examples.