Hacker News Reader

Comment by sonnyblarney | Hacker News Reader

I would be wary of joining any startup where a major shareholder is the Father of the founder. Unless you really knew a lot about it. Second major red flag is a company referring to itself as 'startup' after 18 years of operation.

View on HN

What's wrong with the 2 red flags?

I equate startup but downsides like longer hours, less salary, higher pressure. That is ok for a few years but not sustainable. If you are still working like that after 18 years, I would consider that a commercial failure.

Nothing wrong with family funded business but if after 18 years the 'dad' is the major shareholder it's a bad sign they were not able to raise much outside capital.

It's not so bad, most companies are not 'high flying' but if they have 'startup culture' ... maybe not such a great thing.

Also - family companies can be odd. It very much depends on the situation.

An 18 year old company should simply not be referring to itself as a 'startup' and they should have at very least be settling into some kind of routine. It's fine if there isn't hypergalactic growth - but something fundamental should be there.

I find that a lot of companies that refer to themselves as being bearers of startup culture, is mostly trying to cater to younger people or at least a young mindset - not because they're necessarily trying to hide insane working hours or demands. Sometimes it truly is about passion and keeping a "beginner's mind". Definitely not for everyone, but to me it feels very inspiring and empowering.

(I work for 15+ year company that like to view itself as a startup - but the partying is definitely optional)

> Nothing wrong with family funded business but if after 18 years the 'dad' is the major shareholder it's a bad sign they were not able to raise much outside capital.

Or they didn't have a need to. Why depend on other peoples money if you're fine without?

Because family rounds would have been earlier, and typically want less risk. Also, there are almost 0 companies that can do just as well with $10M as they can with 100.

More money is a powerful sign of momentum, and it generally increases valuation.

So sure, maybe $50M is enough and 'more' just comes on worse terms ... but a small company avoiding going past Round A ... it's far more likely they just couldn't raise.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com