Venture backed companies have a strange relationship to positive cashflow. Because they have financial backers who can and do finance losses, they tend to operate in the red for a long time.
In the early days it makes sense to burn cash. If you do not have revenues, you can’t generate cash. And if you can’t grow your revenues without investing out ahead of income, then you also need to be able to operate in the red.
But I have often felt that this muscle memory of investing for growth at the expense of profits can become, and does become, a habit that is hard to break.
If you have positive cashflow, you can control the timing and terms of your capital raises.
If you have positive cashflow, you can buy back your stock if any comes into the market at prices that you and your Board feels is below fair value.
If you have positive cashflow, you can borrow against it to purchase other companies or finance capital requirements.
If you have positive cash flow you can offer cash incentive compensation in lieu of ever more expensive equity compensation.
I could go on, but I suspect you get the point. Positive cash flow puts you on control versus the capital markets.
And that is a very valauble position to be in and one that a number of high flying tech companies probably wish they were in right now.
