It's shitty that the dichotomy being presented here is "direct path to multi-billion dollar company" and "fizzle".
Is there no room for small, stable, profitable companies in startupland?
Is there no room for small, stable, profitable companies in startupland?
There is room for them but outside of startupland - a small, stable, profitable company is the exact opposite of a startup, and has entirely different funding and ownership models than startups do.
If it's stable and profitable, then it doesn't need investors, and if it's stable and not expected to become huge, investors don't need it.
If it's small, stable and "needs investors" because it's not profitable, well, then it has fizzled already.
And, crucially, a stable and a profitable company doesn't need investment even if it would benefit from it, it wouldn't fizzle out without investment or (obviously) it actually isn't stable or profitable.
Its up to you. Its not like VC's owe you investment to make a small business.
They aren't commited to a high risk strategy. They may have planned it that way but that may because /everyone/ does it that way. What's wrong with putting other options on the table.
There's nothing wrong with having a small business, I'm actually somewhat convinced they generate more user value, and can treat their employees better these days.
[0] many people, myself included, define startup as a company seeking rapid growth, using investor capital to do so and will most likely rapidly die if it can't. Versus any new company under the sun that can be sustainable.