But how can that be? At the end of the day some consumer must foot the bill and cover all the additional costs of B2B services. Ultimately businesses are only comfortable paying others businesses because they found a way to make money (i.e. sell to customers, somewhere down the line)
In earlier comment you said: "Vietnam and Afghanistan .... Those were pure proxy wars. This is not a proxy war, it is a direct hot war."
And here you wrote: "This is not a proxy war. Russia is involved directly on its border. A proxy war is in a far off land." And I was saying that Afghanistan was not a far off land, it was on the border, so your two usages of "proxy war" weren't consistent.
Sorry, I don't understand your second paragraph, I was not trying to draw an analogy with USSR and Afghanistan.
As I understand, your argument is instead that: "Afghanistan was not important to USSR, so USSR did not consider using nuclear weapons then", while "Ukraine is a core interest of Russia, so it will rather start a nuclear war (and risk destruction of the world) rather than back down and return to the positions before Feb 24th."
I don't know if this statement is as obviously correct as it may seem to you. Certainly many believe that Russia is not willing to self-destruct to stand the ground here.
> Putin wouldn't even be a thing, and modern world would be vastly different, if NATO did not exist.
You're right, it would be different. Russia would be all over the Baltics, Finland, parts of Poland and Romania, performing special peacekeeping operations.
> Excuse for what?
Excuse for attacking and occupying neighboring countries. Russia's track record goes back in history much further than 1949.
How convenient. What was Russia's excuse before NATO was created? Do you really think that if NATO did not exist that Putin would keep it in its borders?
You may attempt to apply the same analogy to drinking water, and see that it doesn't work.
If you drink as much as you want, then you'll probably drink too much (with whatever negative consequences arising as a result).
But, except for some extreme circumstances, I don't think people drink much more than is necessary to quench their thirst.
That is your conclusion might still be correct, but it doesn't follow from the analogy with eating.
Looking at their MRR growth, it seems that they had ~$5K MRR in Spring of 2020, at the time they joined TinySeed.
So perhaps a more technically accurate post would be: "How we bootstrapped to $60K ARR, then took a small investment and grew the company to $1MM ARR" ?
When, in the lifecycle of the company, can you sell a small stake of it and still call it bootstrapped? Basecamp sold a bit of equity in 2006 to Bezos[1], and is still considered the epitome of the bootstrapped company.
Additionally, if one has a couple hundred K after working at MANGA or wherever, or has wealthy parents/friends and uses that money to build their own start-up, is that still bootstrapping?
To me, their journey is much closer to bootstrapping, and is quite an impressive achievement. Congrats, guys!
But why do you submit the same link multiple times? I count at least 4 submissions in the past weeks.