[ryancarson]

> I've heard the following advice frequently amongst non-tech entrepreneurs: aim your first exit for a million, then 10 million, then aim for the home runs.

This idea seems laughable to me. As if you can perfectly time and control those outcomes. Ha! :)

[nikcub]

It is more to do with scale than the actual figures. In using sums like "million dollar", "10 million dollar" and then terms like "home run", "swing" etc. you're actually trying to define different scales of startup ideas that don't have a better terminology - but probably should.

There is a completely different risk profile in small businesses, then paid apps, then freemium products, then ad supported products. They are distinct, we just don't have a good way of communicating the differences.

One school of startup advice advises against raising money while another says to raise as much as you can. Rather than being in conflict, it is clear that they don't actually contradict each other but rather apply in different situations.

The don't-raise-money school that DHH et al preach is suitable for paid products and services, while an ad supported idea like a search engine or social network, or an idea with heavy R&D requirement requires that money is raised.

One million / 10 million / home run is a very imperfect way of classifying this distinction. The differences are all in the cashflow model - atm we refer to a flat cashflow model, a linearly increasing cashflow model, an exponentially increasing cashflow model and cashflow models that go negative for 2-3 years and then go either linear or exponential all as 'startups'.

[ryancarson]

Fair point - revenue is just a way to speak about size. Amongst my CEO friends, yearly revenue is used as the blunt measurement of the size of business.

I would say there's some validity to the fact that each step can build on the previous. I almost laugh when I think about how little I knew back in 2004 about the mechanics, tactics and financing of startups. However, that knowledge wasn't the limiting factor. It was the idea.

[bjelkeman-again]

To me it is more about learning and doing better at each attempt. But yeah, "perfectly time and control" these things I doubt anyone actually seriously thinks they can do.