[hobofan]

I'm sorry to take it out on this specific announcement, as it just seems to be one of many "offenders", but why are the 15 investors listed on an announcement blog post of a semi-stealth startup?

With most of them being VC or high-count angel investors, they can combined push whatever product is being built here into 200+ companies independent of whether it is good or not. What happened to the good old way of figuring out product market fit first? Is that the only way a product can succeed nowadays, or why else would a ~billionair that could easily fund it himself pull in that many investors that early?

---

I'm excited to see what Superlogical will build, but the startup scene seems to grow more clique-y by the day.

[01284a7e]

"With most of them being VC or high-count angel investors, they can combined push whatever product is being built here into 200+ companies independent of whether it is good or not"

Ah, I see you have figured it out the thing that has always been the case.

[hobofan]

I don't doubt that, but that phenomenon seems to be reaching egregious levels.

[dewey]

You are commenting that on a website where this is part of the value proposition since the early days, so I wouldn't say that's a new phenomenon.

[dust-jacket]

I think the generous take would be...

- it demonstrates they have funding (pre-empting "no-one will fund something weird like this")

- its transparent and open (pre-empting "which bastards are the ones who really own it?")

[oooyay]

> why else would a ~billionaire that could easily fund it himself pull in that many investors that early?

Investors can be good for funding but they can also be good for education. Later, they're also very good for strategy.

> What happened to the good old way of figuring out product market fit first? Is that the only way a product can succeed nowadays

Generally it's very challenging. I have two products I'm building this way and you face a lot of up-hill climb where people with VC backing are getting the door opened for them. Of course, because of those same pressures to deliver and succeed, it's equally possible those same doors will eventually get closed on them.

I think Mitchell also lives in a bit of a bubble now. He went from friendly open source guy to very rich friendly open source guy. That's no knock on him, but I would consider viewing business from the perspective of someone who has been a CEO, CTO, and IC at the same company (his company) as his only job who became insanely wealthy as a result. I have a friend who has largely only worked in big tech, and successful startups, who tells me all the time level and salary don't matter to him. They don't matter to him because he found success early. Again, not a knock but sustained success will shape how you view the world and how you play the game.

[tchalla]

> I'm excited to see what Superlogical will build, but the startup scene seems to grow more clique-y by the day.

Insert "It always was" meme

[otterley]

> why else would a ~billionair that could easily fund it himself pull in that many investors that early

That was my question, too. Does Mitchell even need to take outside funding? I get why you would prefer to use others' poker chips instead of your own, especially if they're happy to give them to you, but usually funding comes with strings attached.

[rglover]

> why else would a ~billionair that could easily fund it himself pull in that many investors that early?

Something something "never spend your own money if you can spend someone else's money." That plus the perception of having those specific investors gives the idea/business fast authority/prestige.

It's not the gangster move, but it's a move.

[xyzsparetimexyz]

Of course they need VC money! How else are they gonna hire the worlds best vibe coders?

[giancarlostoro]

It's really awkward when you consider projects like Bun, which were VC funded, and ultimately bought out by a large company, what would they have even done to pay back the VCs that funded them?

[colesantiago]

Ghostty and libghostty was product market fit.

Superlogical (allegedly) uses it for the multiplexer.

Mitchell Hashimoto is just the icing on the cake and he has a track record of building defining dev tools used by millions of devs.

So it makes sense why you see 15 angel investors.

More money / investment in the dev tool space is great for everyone!

[hobofan]

I'm not doubting that Mitchell Hashimoto is capable of building great products with great product market fit. Quite the opposite, as the few strands of idolization that exist within me rank him as one of the best to ever do it in the dev tooling space.

I'm also not doubting that there would be tons of investors throwing themselves at him for a new venture like this.

But why, apart from forced market access would it be in his interest to take that money, given that he can nicely fund it for a few years with ~1% of his net worth if not for forced market access?

[ksec]

I seriously doubt it is for the money.

It said they are funded, but it doesn't mean they lost control or have to be VC hyper growth. Apart from Notable Capital and Amplify Partners all others are individuals. There are lots of benefits having these group of company founders and CEO as investors. They are likely interested in the problem space as well.

Had it been hyper growth startup you would be looking at a16z or other bigger names.

[jonas21]

1. Accountability - even very talented people can lose motivation or get distracted. Having investors to report to helps with this.

2. Recruiting - many people would be wary of working on a rich guy's pet project. Taking investment makes it more of a real company that has to deliver something and is not subject solely to the whims of one person.

[beacon294]

yes, dev tooling investment has always been disappointing. Mainly due to stingy buyers.