TLDR software startups don’t need as much capital in AI era so bootstrapping is more feasible. VC still needed for hard tech.
In general I don’t agree. I think the author is severely discounting the impact of VC. But I do agree it’s probably never been easier to run a legitimate business with 1-a few people.
Feels like a naive view of capital. If your direct competitor has $10M they are most likely going to beat you because more resources are generally better than less. If I can out market you it often doesn’t matter that your product is superior.
Everything else being the same, more resources are better than less. Yet, VC money comes with strings attached.
VC doesn't want a startup to become just a healthy business. It needs to grow at a breakneck speed. In fact, for a VC, it's better to put pressure on somewhat successful startups to take a moonshot at becoming unicorns, even at the grave risk of going bust instead.
The expectation to spend the funding round in 12-18 months is a well-established pattern. So you get millions, but you have to spend it fast.
Running a product development consultancy, I routinely see products/businesses that could have been built for a fraction of what they cost. You don't need to hire hundreds of developers (pre-2026) and instantly have huge misalignment and coordination issues. You don't need to tokenmaxx the crap of everything (2026), ballooning your AI spend and generating a ton of bloat. That is, unless someone pressures you to spend fast because it's their shot at you becoming a unicorn.
TLDR software startups don’t need as much capital in AI era so bootstrapping is more feasible. VC still needed for hard tech.
In general I don’t agree. I think the author is severely discounting the impact of VC. But I do agree it’s probably never been easier to run a legitimate business with 1-a few people.
Feels like a naive view of capital. If your direct competitor has $10M they are most likely going to beat you because more resources are generally better than less. If I can out market you it often doesn’t matter that your product is superior.
Everything else being the same, more resources are better than less. Yet, VC money comes with strings attached.
VC doesn't want a startup to become just a healthy business. It needs to grow at a breakneck speed. In fact, for a VC, it's better to put pressure on somewhat successful startups to take a moonshot at becoming unicorns, even at the grave risk of going bust instead.
The expectation to spend the funding round in 12-18 months is a well-established pattern. So you get millions, but you have to spend it fast.
Running a product development consultancy, I routinely see products/businesses that could have been built for a fraction of what they cost. You don't need to hire hundreds of developers (pre-2026) and instantly have huge misalignment and coordination issues. You don't need to tokenmaxx the crap of everything (2026), ballooning your AI spend and generating a ton of bloat. That is, unless someone pressures you to spend fast because it's their shot at you becoming a unicorn.