It’s easy to understand when there are good sales that we continue to develop a startup.

In other cases, there is no objective reason to choose continuation or termination.:

  • maybe a little more, and everything will be fine (as in the famous “Never give up” pictures: a little more and diamonds)
  • or maybe these diamonds are not even close, but there is no way to really find out

As a result, startups close due to lack of money (various surveys on why a startup closed with dozens of possible answers eventually come down to this). Either they really ended, or the shareholders felt it was time to fix the losses.

Of course, there are attempts to add objectivity to this process. Most often, the achievement of some indicators by some time within some budget. Here is the principle of analogy: most startups have already shown something by this point of development, which means this one should. Should this one? For investors in several startups, this can work simply on the principles of statistics. But for the founder, anyway, it remains a matter of faith and financial possibilities.

In this regard, the CTO has a huge impact on the company: a significant part of the budget is on him, he can spend it effectively or not effectively by his actions. This means giving more or less time to the product team to “search for treasure.”

Oddly enough, this post is about CTO (specifically in startups). I have repeatedly seen both an underestimation of the role (without a HUNDRED at all), and people who do not reach this role (just a developer without appropriate additional skills).

I thought about giving you some advice, but I changed my mind. ;) Startup statistics are too bad to say that any advice really helps. There is a principle of reasonableness, but some one factor can kill a completely reasonable startup, and, conversely, make an unreasonable one successful. Therefore, I just repeat: a good service station will give more time to search for sales than a bad one, but this time must also be used correctly.