Comments on: If You are a Startup, Who’s That?

By: NDT Technology

NDT Technology — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 08:43:30 +0000

thanks dear, great post

By: Have We ignored the SMEs Altogether? | NASSCOM India Leadership Forum 2009 Official Blog

Fri, 13 Feb 2009 07:06:33 +0000

[...] SME: Wondering if you are an SME? Read here [...]

By: Vijay

Vijay — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 08:45:07 +0000

Madhu,

Actually you are not reborn, you are just going through the normal cycle of a company and are just doing it right. If you look at the sketch drawing that I had put in the end as an intro to an upcoming post, you’ll see that every startup will enjoy its burst in growth, slowdown and re-emerge. You are in that re-emerging phase. Good luck with everything Madhu.

By: C P Madhusudan

C P Madhusudan — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 07:29:07 +0000

Vijay,

That is well written and a timely article for us. We are actually 7 years old but have reinvented ourselves 2 years ago and hence we are a re born or re generated start up. But you are right, as founders we have operated in a start up mode thus far but are moving out of that mode into SME and hopefully bigger.

By: Vijay

Vijay — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 07:17:49 +0000

Santosh,

Oh before the meeting is over, I make sure that I tell them. That’s just how it starts.

By: santosh

santosh — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 07:08:33 +0000

Just wondering…rather than a ‘prolonged Okayyy’, wouldn’t it serve them better, if you directly tell them what they are really are. Using your AA example, an alcoholic doesn’t really understand he is an alcoholic until people around him tell him he needs help.

By: Vijay

Vijay — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 12:32:28 +0000

I dont agree that facebook is really worth 15billion$. The dollar itself is falling, so $15bn probably means a lot more now as well, but i dont think Microsoft’s valuation was built on market value. It was built on opportunity and it justifies their take.

Google is an anomaly. It will probably be another decade before we see another such company.

Do we really want to measure everyday things to anomalies?

I had already written on facebook and their ridiculous valuation before at http://vijaysblog.wordpress.com/2007/10/27/the-hoopla-on-facebooks-valuation/

By: Krishna Mony

Krishna Mony — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 08:28:17 +0000

I think startups get labeled by perception. So I say they elude a precise definition. What looks like an early stage startup to a VC could be a full blown company for the founder or vice versa. VC having seen more mature ventures, uses a relative, stage/revenue based, slotting criteria. For the founder, it is the aggregation – of the risks he took, sacrifices he made and the quantum of effort that had gone in to get this far – that weighs in as a metric.

Does a label really matter? Look at this contrast. Facebook loses a million $$ a day, but is valued at $15 billion (Microsoft paid $240 MM for a 1.6% stake). Wipro is valued at just under $14 billion even as it earns $840 MM a year. How do you label these? Is Facebook a startup just because it has negative cash flows while boasting of 60 million users? Then Wipro should be a “micro something” because it is valued a tad lower and has just a few hundred customers! What matters in the end is earnings and cash flows – but that went for a toss here! Conclusion : Labels hardly matter.

Now take those startup examples you gave (a) two member bootstrapping team hacking away at a prototype and (b) the seven year old, 24 member strong team with $250 K in revenues – both labeling themselves as startups. Here maturity levels get assessed by whether they aim too high or too low, than by vintage. Each feel they’ve a long way to go. The former feels that because he is still scraping alpha; the latter feels so perhaps because he aims still higher – in seven years he just has managed $250 K in revenue while Google notched up $ 1 billion in as many years.

We can’t obviously dictate the club to which they go.