Hello HNinizes,
First of all a little disclaimer, my question is just out of curiosity and does not imply any stand I take on the subject. I do not consider myself to take a stand as I have not done any startup of my own.
I have been frequenting HN for over two years now, and it has inspired me a lot. The discussions and posts over here have helped me grow at quite and accelerated pace. But as I started to read about startups, I found a very odd similarity. 90% of the startups I hear about on HN either have an exit strategy right from the start or are working towards an exit strategy when they "figure things out". All in all, the prime goal of making a startup is to get acquired.
I find that rather odd. People give a big chunk of their life working on something they care about. And when that thing finally starts to pay them back, they sell it to someone else. I think if I will ever succeed in making my own dream company, I will sell it only when it is not making profit for me.
Please help me understand the rationale behind the this craze of getting acquired.
At that point, no one will want to buy it from you. The goal for most startups is to either get big enough to go public, or get acquired by a bigger company. The second option is attractive because in theory you can use the resources of the bigger company to grow your startup at a much faster pace, and you don't have the risk of running out of funding. With today's startups getting by on a lot less funding than in the past (thousands to millions today vs tens of millions to hundreds of millions a decade ago), the road to IPO is a lot longer than the road to acquisition.
I personally would rather bootstrap a startup or just take a small seed round and get acquired for $10-30 million (I believe these are called "dipshit companies") than raise round after round and doing an IPO 10 years out (risking having a competitor come along in that time and put me out of business).