This isn't a tech* company. It's a prepared food/grocery delivery business with too much VC and some fancy design.
*there's actually no such thing as a tech company at all
*there's actually no such thing as a tech company at all
For example, an app that is running on a few servers can gain users more quickly than it needs to hire additional workers. A company like Blue Apron has to grow its warehouse staff as it gains new subscribers, effectively meaning that its SG&A and overhead costs scale fairly evenly with growth.
Just because you use technology to improve productivity and output compared to a competitor does not mean you are a "tech" company - it means you're better at doing whatever your business is.
I was trying to offer an explanation of what separates out "tech" companies and not trying to get into the nitty gritty of the fact that many companies use technologies. I would argue that a manufacturing company whose innovation is a more streamlined assembly line to product some widget is not a "tech" company in the sense that many people on hacker news use the word.
I don't consider a frying pan manufacturer a tech company just because they have managed to grow by optimizing their supply chain and productivity.
Alternatively I also think a company that makes brand new technology year after year even if they scaling one for one with hiring is still a tech comapny
I think what you describe might just be a general guideline for identifying a financially successful company not necessarily a tech company. People hear VC funding or IPO and often automatically think it must be a tech company by conflating technology and financial success.
I think you are getting caught up in definitions for the concept in a vacuum. I was just trying to help explore "tech" when it comes to hacker news and the VC landscape, whether or not I agree with the definition.
Do you make/sell Software
Do you make/sell computerized hardware
*Do you have a platform that fundamentally solves what would otherwise be a technology problem for other people, ie expose your technology so others can leverage it(via API/SDK, SaaS or other such on-boarding method).
None of this is clear cut as there are many grey areas but in general if you are creating technology for others to use and that is your core operation then you're a technology company.
Selling packaged food while using an App or Website does not make you a technology company. Blue Apron could completely outsource their technology work and I doubt it would fundamentally change the makeup of the company, you couldn't do that with a technology company.
If they're selling hardware then it's a hardware company. Likewise if it's software. There is no way to sell technology, you sell the end product or service.
> you couldn't do that with a technology company.
Yes you can, it's just building software or other work. Don't buy into this special Silicon Valley hipster thinking, getting things done and making (and selling) a product the market wants is all that matters. How you get there doesnt. And none of it makes you a tech company.
Same goes for Casper, which dubs itself a "sleep startup" (whatever the hell that means). They sell and deliver mattresses.
Increasingly, successful companies require ownership of proprietary technology, rather than purchase of commodity technology from third parties, and in that way more and more companies - even those in "traditional" fields - have invested in in-house tech R&D.
More importantly, software engineering has become a critical part of companies' success, even if the company doesn't ship software to end users (see: UPS, FedEx, Visa, MasterCard).
It certainly seems like the old definitions of "tech company" is increasingly archaic - is Amazon a tech company? Or are they just a retailer that uses technology? Is Grubhub a tech company, or just a delivery service with a frontend?
> "Every company uses technology, at which point saying anything like "tech company" is a useless modifier compared to just "company"."
I think that's exactly the point. Software has become so critical to almost every field (and more importantly: in-house developed software) that many companies have become tech companies, and those that haven't are either getting on the bandwagon shortly, or will perish soon after.
There may come a point where "company" vs. "tech company" loses its distinction, but for now it seems like "companies" are becoming "tech companies" rather quickly.
Some are more cutting edge with newer tech, but that's making the process and operations better, with their end goal still being the same (whether it's selling software or groceries).
Google and SpaceX (like every other person and company on the planet) uses technology to create these products and services, but that's it.