Hacker News Reader

If every $1 becomes $3 ~ $4 in profit, makes no sense at all to "save" for equipment.

The progression with only investing in ads, each cycle multiply by tree your profit:

$1 -> $3 -> $9 -> $27 -> $81 -> $243 -> $729 -> $2187

The progression with "saving" the money

$1 -> $2 -> $3 -> $4 -> $5 -> $6 -> $7 -> $8

I think they're saying that they are unable to meet the demand (lack of either equipment or people) for the new business those extra advertising dollars would bring in. So they can't just continually pour $ into that pump.

Although I agree it's unusual to see that metric used (revenue per ad-spend) for a product that seemingly can't be scaled very much.

They probably could benefit from some finance. Or at least factoring.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com