[wellboy]

I've been thinking about this a lot, too. Is there any startup that inevitably needs early investment? Except for biotech or massive big data startups of course.

Because if your product does something new, you can ALWAYS get PR.

What I've seen is that with funding, founders don't focus on the essentials anymore. They are not as careful with whom to hire, they don' think as much about what marketing channels to spend money on. However, without funding, you are basically forced to focus on the very core of your startup, every decision needs to be very thoughtful and you will need to understand every process in your startup in-depth.

A friend of mine once said, funding should never be a lifeline, - it should be motivated by a fast expansion opportunity.

[lhnz]

>> Is there any startup that inevitably needs early investment?

Yes.

In the UK, if you try to make a company which helps people travel overseas and arranges somewhere for them to stay then you are caught by all sorts of travel regulation. You'll need a £40K bond as well as all sorts of upfront costs just to get started.

So pre-traction you've had to spend huge amounts of money to enter the game.

Large regulatory costs are one of the ways big companies keep new entrants out.

[cookiecaper]

>Because if your product does something new, you can ALWAYS get PR.

Heh, that's a nice fairy-tale world you live in, man.