A startup doesn't need to be a unicorn

VC incentives and founder outcomes

• Many comments argue VCs are driven by portfolio math: they need a few 100x outcomes, so anything aiming for a $10–50M exit is effectively a “2x dog” and uninteresting.
• This creates misalignment: founders only have one company and care deeply about survival; VCs “pattern match,” push hypergrowth, and often burn teams and decent products (examples cited: games, Evernote, Wunderlist, SoundCloud).
• Some push back on “all VCs are dumb,” noting a wide spectrum of quality among investors.

What is a “startup”? Unicorn vs. small business

• One camp uses the classic “high-growth, scalable model” definition (PG essay cited); by that standard, a startup more or less does need unicorn-scale ambition for VC to make sense.
• Others use “startup” to mean any new company, including local services and “lifestyle businesses,” and see the unicorn framing as a VC marketing trick that delegitimizes sane, profitable companies.
• Several note that calling yourself a “startup” can actually scare off customers, who want stability and proof, not pre-revenue “potential.”

Middle paths, angels, and “seed-strapping”

• The article’s “raise ~$1M, keep 90%+, grow to a modest but life-changing exit” model resonates with many, especially for B2B SaaS.
• Skeptics question whether enough angels exist who will knowingly accept only 2–3x returns with high risk, especially pre-revenue and without YC-style signaling.
• Others advocate “seed-strapping”: put in your own savings, get to actual paying customers, then raise only if it accelerates something already working.

Government and non-VC capital

• Detailed discussion of German and EU programs (founder stipends, low-interest loans, consulting subsidies) and US/Canadian analogs (SBIR, SR&ED).
• Supporters say these programs produce stable, regionally valuable “normal companies” in the German Mittelstand tradition.
• Critics see heavy bureaucracy, perverse incentives, and “zombie” companies optimized for grants rather than customers.

Bureaucracy, jurisdiction, and structure

• Long subthread on German company forms (GmbH, UG, sole proprietorship), minimum capital rules, notaries, and compliance versus US/Estonia ease-of-incorporation.
• Some argue German bureaucracy and social structures dampen entrepreneurship; others say it’s manageable and buys trust and worker protection.

Bootstrapped and niche wins

• Multiple anecdotes: niche SaaS with a handful of employees generating seven-figure profits; internal use of LLMs to replace large teams; small CRUD apps sold directly to local businesses.
• General conclusion: small, capital-efficient, non-unicorn companies can make founders “filthy rich” relative to their headcount, even if they’d be meaningless blips in VC terms.