DISQUS

Debbie - Absolutely, by all means feel free to republish the article. I'll email you directly.

David - SaaS is commonly recognized as a way of saving money, as well as spreading the costs of software / IT over time more effectively. Generally I think SaaS can save companies money. I also think they can buy simpler, "smaller" products via a SaaS model and worry less about ultra-long sales cycles and bloat-ware.

@Engago Team: Why do you say that? If the goal of a company - that's been venture backed - isn't to exit, what is the goal?

@Martin: I don't really think the exit is taboo, but what worries investors is when startups think they can snap their fingers and exit because "so and so exited" and it "looked pretty fast and easy." The focus on the exit can lead to a false sense of entitlement or ease with which it takes place.

Basil - Send me a copy of the book, I'm happy to take a look and provide feedback.

@David Cohen - I understand completely. I think the emergence of small venture fund incubators like TechStars has further popularized the possibility of creating startups with less, and doing so faster. And the result, in some cases, has been fairly "quick" or "small" exits - which get publicized extensively because of where they're coming from (and also because the companies funded tend to be B2C focused, with good viral traction.)

Thanks for stopping by...

Carl - I can always send you my PayPal email address...no concern of anything being lost in the mail *smile*

You made the right moves with Defensio, and I know you did it based on an evaluation of the opportunity, competition, market, etc. And I think that's what's important for people to realize - you don't just build a "small startup" and get an easy exit, it takes a lot of strategic planning, thinking, positioning, etc. to execute and exit successfully.

Thanks for all the comments folks - hopefully we can continue the dialogue here, on other blogs and on Twitter. And FriendFeed too, if you insist!

@Kevin: I agree that using friend count as a measure of authority is questionable, unless you have the blog readership or something else to support it. I'd say that the best / most read blogs out there STILL have more RSS readers (and email subscribers) than they have Twitter followers, but it is much easier to build up Twitter followers than blog readers. The question ultimately is this: Which one is more valuable?

@Fred: I'm glad to see Robert devoting more time to his blog, I think it will universally help him consolidate his brand and restore / evolve his reputation and brand going forward.

@DaveMur: I like the analogy but it's not entirely right. Twitter is more like perpetual snacking, and blogging is the meat and potatoes. An appetizer would mean it comes before the main meal, whereas I think Twitter and Blogging is the other way around. You blog first then use Twitter to engage and maintain the conversation.

Thanks for all the comments.

Jeff - I think the tree is shaking mightily at this point.

Thank you to everyone that commented.

@Kat: I've learned that it's important to show VCs potential acquisition partners -- Who is going to buy you? Oftentimes VCs will ask that question because ultimately that's the goal (at least for most VC-backed startups.)

So you should have a list of potential acquirers in your mind, and you should have legitimate reasons for that list. And you may even be building strategy and product against that list.

@Aleksandar - thanks for the comment, and it doesn't surprise me that an increase in price resulted in more sales. Who knows if other things you were doing also had an affect on sales, but generally a lot of people do equate PRICE with VALUE. That won't be the case all the time, especially with consumers who expect to get everything for free (tsk, tsk) but it's definitely true in other areas.

@Mike: I think the growth of SaaS is inevitable, although it won't be as robust in 2009 with the recession. But with powerhouses like Amazon behind cloud computing, you can't really get away from the overall SaaS model at this point in time.

When I started in SaaS - around 1998/1999 - companies were afraid of a lot of things - security, stability, paying monthly - but most of those fears/concerns are gone.

Someone mentioned that this comment box wasn't working, I'm testing it out.

The pants are expensive, but they're Instigator Pants. I haven't bought any mind you...

@Vinodh - I'm always happy to link out to quality content. Hope you'll keep stopping by and commenting!

@Ken: Thanks for the comment. I think it's time to focus on cash flow and profitability, although if you're raising $$ then valuation is key. And the reality is that you'll suffer on valuation when raising money, there's no two ways about.

What I've heard is that flat is the new up, and down is the new flat. So if you get a flat valuation from your previous round that's considered a huge win. If you get funded at a lower valuation that's still considered a win.

I should probably register InstigatorPants.com - build up a whole new brand *smile*

@Dan: Going "big" can still mean generating revenue. I've argued in the past (as have others) that focusing on revenue is becoming more and more important in these difficult economic times. So I agree with you.

It's a question of defining "going big".

@Alain: I agree, the EGO has a big part to play in making decisions. And CEOs are not known for having small egos!

Used the template tags and it's working - except for Google. Did a few searches, clicked on the result links from Google and it doesn't say anything.

I tested Digg and Twitter quickly - both worked.

@Kelli: I would agree - that you can learn a great deal through social media, by connecting with others in your peer group, industry, etc. Experts and veterans of social media are readily available as well - through social media - to help out.

@Dina: Thanks! Glad you enjoyed the post, thank you for stopping by and commenting.

Thanks for the comments. I survived the last tech bubble burst as well (although this isn't exactly a tech bubble burst like 2001 or so) by also focusing on many of the things described above. It was a challenge, but we survived.

@howard lindzon: Same. It was a pleasure to finally meet in-person. Best of luck with StockTwits...

@Tim: No matter what you still have to learn on the go - that's part of the process and an important one, but having some guiding hands to help you is critical.

@Jonathan: Innovation is a "big" word. The best product doesn't always win, and right now it's definitely not about the best product - it's about the best business model, sales & marketing focus, execution, customer service. Innovation wins over the long term, but even still there are examples of crappier products dominating because of the "business" side of things.

@Maria: I'm quite vigilant about marking those offenders as spammers as well; but some do slip through the spam check software I use and then I have to manually label them. That can take some time, and I know how frustrating it can be.

@Tim: The short answer is this: "It depends." There are a lot of variables in the equation. But from the sounds of it, this business is a "lifestyle business" which you want to grow but not scale to be worth $100M and exit from. Venture capital will require such a plan - that within 3-5 years you've grown the business to a size that it can exit for $50M+. If that's not the type of business you're running or want to run then venture capital makes no sense.

A small business loan might help you scale, but there are risks in taking loans as well. I would probably lean towards bootstrapping and trying to increase sales to the point where you can hire, to continue growing the business.