Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Completely agree. Underachieving according to what criteria? The criteria of modern capitalism of high velocity ever increasing profit for their investors and shareholders. Not about popularity, sustainability or user base, but money.


I think they are interpreting pivots as a sign that the founders and/or investors wanted to change direction, because the previous direction wasn't succeeding.

I'm all for small, sustainable sites which provide a service and don't try to monetise too desperately. But when you take $50 million in VC funding, surely the founders know they're boarding the ten-times-return-or-bust train?


"Not about popularity, sustainability or user base, but money."

By what criteria would you say that those companies are sustainable?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: