> Fact: the moon is made of blue cheese
My opinion - articles that try to generalise from a certain kind of start-up to all start-ups don't really stand up
By all means, lots of great, passionate startups hire agencies to help with all kinds of things. I just wouldn't be surprised if a whole lot of get-rich-quick dreamers did too.
I'm not even sure she has a specific meaning for the word "startup," or that her usage means the same thing that most other people mean by that term.
Most people want most things as a means to an end, so it's hard for me to see how using product sales/adoption as a driver toward being an attractive acquisition is unusual, surprising or crazy; but either way, not every startup wants to be acquired, and not every startup is trying to drive toward that end. One of the many "facts" in the article that are not facts.
I worked with the startup Streamable.com for a short time, and Armen, the CEO, once told me something really insightful. He said to me, "There are no 'product' people - successful web products are designed by listening to your users and designing appropriately." As the CEO, he was the one listening to users and communicating with them. I thought this was a novel approach, and given how great Streamable is, I think Armen was on to something.
Don't just call me a fat lazy slob as I'm tripping down the stairs.
If you add up all the generalizations in the article, though (e.g. looking good for a future acquirer above all else) we're talking about a small fraction of start-ups, not start-ups as a category.