Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by soundlab 4274 days ago
I think one of the distinctions is that for bootstrapping you can start with something (very) small and end with something big over a long period of time. Whereas when you take on venture capital the expectation is to build something very big very fast.

The latter requires more capital to expedite the ROI for the VC whereas the former is typically a much slower, organic process that may not reach an equivalent scale for 10+ years. I'm a firm proponent of bootstrapping and organic growth. After a few years of positive cashflow and growth you can walk into a commercial bank (gasp!) and setup revolving lines of credit or expansion capital to fund more growth.

1 comments

> you can walk into a commercial bank (gasp!) and setup revolving lines of credit or expansion capital to fund more growth.

commercial banks are incredibly hesitant to do this even if you've passed the magical 5 year mark. their commercials loans are underwritten by people who are extremely risk averse, and the "commercial bankers" at your local branch are basically the people who aren't good enough for investment banking i.e. the b-stringers who don't understand how a technology business works. they'll just say no. in fact, it's their job to say no. i have my doubts as to how much money they even make with their loans. most of their revenue comes from fees these days.

however - there are thousands of specialized finance firms who will gladly help you, because there is a massive hole in the middle of the money market for these kinds of funds. they will provide you with:

* revolving lines of credit

* commercial equipment leases

* straight up loans

* special insurance

* lots of other industry-specific stuff that a bank just doesn't even know exists

this entire industry has sprang up "overnight" in the past 10 years - the vast, vast majority of new businesses in america are bootstrapped (think restaurant, construction company, small accounting firm, small scale manufacturing/machining, software companies, etc). venture capital and large banks are not involved. this isn't their game. it's "main street".

these specialized firms generally specialize in an industry i.e. construction, technology, food service, etc. and will know at a glance if your business is healthy or not. and don't worry - they'll find you. they have a knack for swooping in at exactly the right time. they also will not require a personal guarantee, which is a huge leg up on the banks, who will make you sign at least 2 or 3 documents saying they own your life.

if you ask me, commercial banks are nearly useless for anything but checking accounts and wire transfers. they're run by morons, or at least people who don't give a damn about technology businesses, which is tantamount to being a moron in the 21st century.

Sounds like you've had some negative experiences with your bank. I would beware of "specialized finance firms" that have "sprung up overnight". Typically their lines are very limited and come with huge rates. I don't think there's really much complexity to technology businesses that most competent finance guys can't figure out. They are looking at your P&L and financials for some key ratios, pretty simple. Regardless of whether you're selling lawn mowers or SaaS they want to see strong cashflow. If you're trying to get a loan on MAU growth projections you're probably right.
first of all, "pop up overnight" is in "quotes" because they didn't pop up over night. this industry and firms have been in existence for decades but only grew quickly in the last 10 years because commercial banks stopped lending money. did you hear about something called the "credit crisis"?

second, what you're saying is so blindingly obvious that it doesn't even need to be said - startups do not fall into the category of traditional businesses with strong P&Ls and great balance sheets and constantly increasing margins, like a bank wants to see. most bootstrapped startups operate at break even, or can even dip into loss for a few months at a time. these are the companies that need the money.

this will immediately disqualify you for a bank loan. which is the original premise of this entire thread - the banks won't give you shit.

--startups do not fall into the category of traditional businesses with strong P&Ls and great balance sheets--

So as a bootstrapper are you still taking this approach past year 3 or 4? At a certain point you need to hone in on that repeatable / scalable business model and put up some numbers or fold.

If you're a couple years in and have bootstrapped past breakeven your funding options AND odds of survival are greatly improved- so why not orient around that outcome?

I'm not here to defend the absurd behavior and ignorance of commercial banks just pointing out that sometimes the game changes if you can afford to take a slower more incremental approach to growth than what is typically demanded by VC.

yes, you take it past year 3 or 4. you get half a million bucks, a million bucks in the bank during the first years, and then you start spending it on real things. sometimes your cash dips. sometimes you bolster it with a good few months. however, you can't spend it all - you need capital. you need a reasonable amount of debt you can service.

when the bank sees this, they will flip the fuck out. but someone with experience in your industry and a specific financial product designed to help you will know exactly what you're doing.

it's repeatable, it's scalable - however, it requires money to grow just like every other business. this isn't skating by on ultra thin margins with $50k in the bank - it's a business with significant cash that needs significantly more cash, and is willing to sacrifice margins in the short term to grow. and that's not what banks do (these days).

+1. That's precisely my first hand experience.
I really appreciate what you've laid out here and honestly would like to know more about it, both as a bootstrapper and as an investor.