Basecamp - When good companies turn "bad"?
Context - This latest blog post by Jason Fried, founder of Basecamp is blowing up on tech Twitter today:
https://world.hey.com/jason/changes-at-basecamp-7f32afc5
Like most on here, I've watched 37signals, then Basecamp, grow from a fledgling company since just about day 1. I wouldn't say I was a fan boy, but I respected some of the things did, or tried to do. But not all.
Why? Well, basically, I think it is easy to do things like lavish benefits and company credit cards upon your employees, and push books and advice on to others when you are raking in the money. Basecamp has been earning positive cashflow since pretty much week 1, which is a far cry from many startups around.
But I have heard the term "Character is like toothpaste - it only comes out under pressure".
I never really listened to Jason's or DHH's advice because I thought it was a little too rose coloured for me. After all, they had never had to face the nightmare of having to meet payroll when there is $0 in the bank, or dealt with an employee doing nefarious things like embezzling the company, or dealt with something like a major data breach.
I guess it is "Survivorship Bias" when everything is sunny and going well and you think that you can do no wrong. Even worse when everyone else believes that you hold all the answers, and you start to believe them in turn, and give out the answers that you think have lead to your success, rather than realising that you were simply privileged, or sheer luck of being in the right place at the right time.
However, the real learning are when the proverbial sh*t hits the fan. How a company or a founder reacts to those sorts of situations is where I think the lessons lie, which is why I probably read more stories of startups that tried and failed rather than those who are on a 'hockey stick' growth path.
Interested to hear the takes from other Indie Hackers here - was what the founders of Basecamp did good or bad? Do they still set the example that others wish to follow?
I read this post, but I haven't been following the chatter. Why is this so controversial? These policies don't strike me as particularly good or bad, just one company's opinion on how to get things done.