Yeah, that's really exactly it. The way I've put it before is that you choose the model that fits where you are in your lifecycle. Or you grow slow, until you choose to (try to) grow fast. I'm not opposed to VC per-se or anything, but our mindset has always been "do it when the time is right". We get a handful of paying customers, real revenue and feel convinced that we've nailed the whole "product /market fit" thing, then we might decide it's time to turn on the afterburners or whatever. But right now, while more money would make some things easier, I wouldn't feel good about taking that on.

The actual measure of success is both size and revenue. Without the former it's a small company, without the latter it's going to get bankrupt unless it changes - with implosion proportional to size.

"An instant" is a huge hyperbole, let's start with verification, legislation, distribution, certification and all other kinds of legal nightmare to get a treatment on the market. Not to mention politics if it's (not) affordable.

If you define "investors" as only VC's then I'd say that's a fair point. But just to paint a different scenario... for us, the only investors are the founders (so far). So why invest in building a company as opposed to putting that money in index funds? I can't speak for all the others, but besides still expecting a larger financial reward in the end, a lot of it is about the joy in the process of building something, and about having the opportunity to do things our own way. This way we get to build a company based on the principles we believe in and that will operate by our standards. And to top it all off, I would say that even if we fail and never make a dime, we'll all have benefited from the process itself simply in terms of learning and experience.

So yeah, sure, VC's want "fast" at all costs. No argument there. I guess what I'm saying is, the "take VC money and grow fast model isn't the only model."