← Back to context Comment by 34679 21 hours ago If revenue growth was all that mattered, you could just sell investor dollars for $0.50. 3 comments 34679 Reply trollbridge 21 hours ago 99¢-Theranos style is better. Takes a lot longer for investors to notice. jacquesm 21 hours ago If you think that's the bar: it's been done, many times over. The unit-cost-profitability test was ignored by many VCs (they learned something and if they had deep enough pockets they got to play again). JumpCrisscross 20 hours ago > If revenue growth was all that matteredStraw man. Nobody argued this. What was falsely stated at the start was turning investor dollars into revenue is easy.I specifically went into unit economics elsewhere [1].[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50243393
jacquesm 21 hours ago If you think that's the bar: it's been done, many times over. The unit-cost-profitability test was ignored by many VCs (they learned something and if they had deep enough pockets they got to play again).
JumpCrisscross 20 hours ago > If revenue growth was all that matteredStraw man. Nobody argued this. What was falsely stated at the start was turning investor dollars into revenue is easy.I specifically went into unit economics elsewhere [1].[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50243393
99¢-Theranos style is better. Takes a lot longer for investors to notice.
If you think that's the bar: it's been done, many times over. The unit-cost-profitability test was ignored by many VCs (they learned something and if they had deep enough pockets they got to play again).
> If revenue growth was all that mattered
Straw man. Nobody argued this. What was falsely stated at the start was turning investor dollars into revenue is easy.
I specifically went into unit economics elsewhere [1].
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50243393