Bootstrapped or VC-funded and why?

I have worked for funded startups, built and led engineering teams, only to feel burnt out. I started working on my current product as a passion project. I was quite sure I do not want to burn out. Instead I want to build a sustainable, profitable business. In the last couple months I started getting lots of positive signals about the tech I am solving and decided to look for co-founders who are relaxed, ambitious and slow. This is not an easy ask but we are here - 4 of us. 3 of us are old friends/colleagues. We want a happy life above everything else. 3 of us are from engineering backgrounds but also 3 of us have played business roles many times. We have discussed the VC approach and walked away from it every time. We are very confident of what we are building, constantly in touch with potential users/clients (we are b2b and b2c with the same underlying tech). We are shaping up the brand now, reaching out, building potential client-base and revenue focused. Let's see what happens.

Bootstrapped so far, but I always leave an open door. Life is too short to limit to one way or another.

I bootstrapped Fitness Central because I want to grow it organically and it is a product that I truly believe in that the world needs. I want the product to last a lifetime.

I have been thinking about bootstrapping but based on previous experience that can only happen succesfully when you have a peace of mind about your daily expenses. This can be either a saving or a job on the side (a full time one will substantially lower your energy to commit and delays time to market). So I would say if you have savings for a year of minimum life costs, definitely go for bootstrap. If not, life is too short to go through the pain and raise funds. That being said, I definitely suggest building at least the mvp and some audience and then pitching and raising funds or you will lose a big chunk of business.

I'm adamant to prove them wrong. It will be a feeling of great accomplishment when we achieve the success we will knowing we've done it on our own. The flip side is we would have liked the mentorship. But that's what books and communities are for, right? VanillaGiftCardBalance com

My plan is to bootstrap until clear product market fit, and then raise money. Some of the founders and companies I most respect did it this way, and it has worked out well for them.

I'm open to VC funding but am happy to bootstrap. The first reason is that with one startup I launched, we got accepted into Antler's accelerator program but did not get funding, nor did we get much out of it. It felt very impersonal, cold, and like they tossed us aside once they decided not to invest. It wasn't easy emotionally. With the product I'm launching here on Product Hunt, we recently got rejected by an accelerator after three rounds of interviews. It was also difficult emotionally. I'm adamant to prove them wrong. It will be a feeling of great accomplishment when we achieve the success we will knowing we've done it on our own. 😁 The flip side is we would have liked the mentorship. But that's what books and communities are for, right?

I've done both and I think it depends on your goals and risk tolerance. Bootstrapping gives you more control and forces you to be lean, but it's a slower, harder path. VC funding gives you runway to grow faster but comes with pressure and loss of control. Personally, I prefer bootstrapping early on to prove out the model, then selectively taking VC money later to pour fuel on the fire once you have traction. But there's no one right answer - you have to do what aligns with your vision and values as a founder. Wishing you all the best whichever path you choose! 🚀

I think this should be discussed case by case. For me, I prefer to bootstrap first to make sure the project starts in the right direction.

Not every startup should be funded. It depends on the potential scale, and the complexity of the project. Try to bootstrap Mars colonization or neuro-brain-chip implantation. Moreover, if we take 2 similar projects for the same ICP, one is bootstrapped and another one is VC funded, which one has more chances to succeed?

Similarly to others I am open to both. Initially when starting my second business I was thinking to only bootstrap but now I am actually starting to see value in maybe opening up to VC funding.

It depends on many factors and preferences. At the very start it's a combination of personal preference and what type of company you are building. Not every business worth pursuing will have "venture scale" potential and that's not a bad thing either. A lot of founders make the early mistake of thinking that their business is something of venture scale, start trying to raise from VC's and get rejection after rejection. Besides having venture-scale potential, accepting VC capital isn't for everyone. You'll have to be accountable to others, your own position will be on the line as well and the way VC's build companies sometimes can lead to a dependence on outside capital for a long period of time which could lead to problems in a VC draught period. In general, when you are building a venture that has the potential to become something huge, VC capital is probably going to be required and useful. That said, I'd suggest to founders to get traction going first with no/minimal outside capital. You want to get to a position of strength when raising and in the early stages, traction combined with m-o-m double/triple digit growth is what will make VC's want to speak with you - they might even hunt you (no pun intended). Happy to help anyone planning to raise, that's literally all I do! Feel free to reach out to me on Linkedin. Soon launching https://raisebetter.capital - a platform that will make fundraising easier than ever for founders.

It also depends what business are your building. There are VC scale businesses VS small business/side hustles you wanna keep building on your own and do the dividend distribution whenever... I am actually working on both right now. let's see how it goes :)