> According to the CEO's linkedin post, they were basically trying to keep up appearances of being a 200 person company until some greater fool bought them out, which appears to have failed.
Because that is what startups do. 80% of startups that are "successful" follow this pattern
You shoot for the moon, if you don't take massive risks, then you won't be rewarded.
It sounded like they were about to be bought out or aquihired, but it fell apart at the last moment (It's not uncommon)
> Far better to be a growing, profitable 50 person company than a cash-burning Potemkin unicorn.
because probably they looked at the pipeline and realised that if they wanted to deliver the features/customer growth they needed, they required 200 people to get there.
Because that is what startups do. 80% of startups that are "successful" follow this pattern
You shoot for the moon, if you don't take massive risks, then you won't be rewarded.
It sounded like they were about to be bought out or aquihired, but it fell apart at the last moment (It's not uncommon)
> Far better to be a growing, profitable 50 person company than a cash-burning Potemkin unicorn.
because probably they looked at the pipeline and realised that if they wanted to deliver the features/customer growth they needed, they required 200 people to get there.