Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The tech companies going public after the last recession are all like this. They squeeze out as much funding they can from investors and when that dries up or when the investors demand their money back the company dumps their stock on the unsuspecting public and makes money. Most of them don’t make money and have terrible balance sheets but still somehow are “great” “unicorns”. I don’t invest in any one of them.



9 out of 10 times, when I ask someone about a woefully unprofitable business model, I get the same answer - seriously, almost every time:

"Yeah but look at Amazon, they had x unprofitable years"

"We're still in the growth phase, our business model relies on scale and market share."


Can confirm. To back test i sometimes ask those people on their opinion on juicero, just to be sure about who i’m dealing with.


The investors themselves aren't blameless in this. It's on them for believing that companies who literally torch money will somehow present them with gold nuggets in return.

It's succeeded for others in the past, but this is very clearly a high-risk field, with the inherent downsides that involved in it.


Although I don't think We is a tech company, this is still true.

https://www.venturecompany.com/blog/2009/08/the-silicon-vall... ^ Voiced the same concerns as the famous Kaufmann Foundation report, but earlier.

At best venture capital seems to be a sexier, private way to fund R&D, which is often so unprofitable it requires public funding. I think there is social benefit, most obviously when venture-backed startups offer a useful service below cost to the public, but financially there are better investments.


WeWork is not tech company, but somehow they seem to always be discussed in the same way as one.


I think the best argument you can make for them as a tech company is that their customers are tech companies.




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

Search: