The Startup Career Nobody Talks About: Building Companies That Aren't Venture-Scale

There's this weird thing that happens when you tell people you're a founder.

They immediately ask: "Have you raised money?"

Not "Are you profitable?" Not "Do customers love it?" Not "Are you happy?"

Just: "Have you raised money?"

And if you say no, there's this pause. This subtle shift. Like you're not playing the real game. Like you're building a "lifestyle business" (said with a slight grimace) instead of a Real Startup™.

Here's what nobody tells you: The best founder career you've never heard of lives in the middle. Between the struggling solopreneur and the venture-backed unicorn chase, there's a massive space where founders are printing money, controlling their destiny, and actually enjoying their lives.

I'm talking about companies doing $3-10M in annual recurring revenue. Profitable. Growing steadily. No term sheets, no board drama, no pressure to 100x in 5 years.

And weirdly? These founders are the happiest ones I know.

The Missing Middle

The startup world has conditioned us to think in binaries:

Either you're:

• A "lifestyle business" making $100-500K/year (not ambitious enough)

• OR you're venture-backed, burning millions, swinging for a $1B+ exit (real founder shit)

But that's not how the world actually works.

Between those two extremes is what I call the missing middle—companies doing $3-10M ARR that are:

• Profitable from year 2 or 3

• Growing 30-50% annually (not 300%, but sustainable)

• Employing 15-50 people who aren't underwater on worthless options

• Throwing off $500K-$3M in actual cash to the founders each year

These businesses exist everywhere. You just don't hear about them because they're not raising Series C rounds that make TechCrunch. The founders aren't on conference stages talking about "hypergrowth" and "category creation."

They're too busy making money.

The $3-10M ARR Sweet Spot

I've talked to hundreds of founders over the years. And here's the pattern I see:

Sub-$1M ARR: Stressful. You're still figuring it out. Cash is tight. Every lost customer hurts.

$1-3M ARR: Getting better. You've proven something works. But you're still grinding.

$3-10M ARR: This is the zone. You're profitable. You have breathing room. You can hire great people. You can invest in product. You're not worried about making payroll. And you still own 80-100% of your company.

$10M+ ARR (bootstrapped): Elite territory, but harder to get to without raising. Not impossible, just rare.

$10M+ ARR (VC-backed): You probably raised $20-50M to get here. You own 20-40% of the company. You have a board breathing down your neck about the next round. Every decision is made through the lens of "does this get us to $100M ARR?"

Here's the thing about that $3-10M sweet spot: Founders are happy.

They're not working 80-hour weeks trying to hit an arbitrary growth target. They're not on fundraising treadmills every 18 months. They're not hiring executives they can't afford to please their Series B lead.

They're building sustainable businesses that solve real problems and generate real cash. Revolutionary, I know.

How VC Expectations Warp Everything

Let me be clear: VC can be great. If you're building infrastructure, hard tech, or something that requires $50M before you can even launch, you need venture capital.

But for most B2B SaaS, services, or productized service businesses? VC fundamentally warps your decision-making.

Product: Without VC, you build features customers will pay for. With VC, you build features that look good in pitch decks and analyst reports. You're chasing "total addressable market" instead of "customers who will give us money right now."

Pricing: Bootstrapped companies charge what their product is worth. VC-backed companies undercharge to maximize growth metrics, then pray they can raise prices later without tanking retention. (Spoiler: they usually can't.)

Hiring: Without VC, you hire when you need someone and can afford them. With VC, you hire to "build for scale" before you have scale. You bring on a VP of Sales when you should still be selling yourself. You hire a data team when you have 50 customers.

Timeline: Bootstrapped founders can take 5-7 years to build a $10M ARR company and be thrilled. VC-backed founders have 24-36 months to prove the model or they're dead. The pressure creates desperate decisions.

I watched a founder turn down a $15M acquisition offer because his investors wanted him to swing for $100M+. The company shut down 18 months later. He walked away with nothing. The investors? They had 50 other bets. For him, it was his career.

When Not Raising Is the Optimal Move

Here's when NOT raising VC is actually the smart play:

1. You can get to $500K-$1M ARR on founder capital or revenue

If you can bootstrap to seven figures, you can get a small credit line or revenue-based financing to scale. You don't need to give away 20% of your company for $2M.

2. Your market is large enough but not massive

VCs need billion-dollar markets. But a $200M market where you can capture 5% ($10M ARR) at 70% margins is a phenomenal business. Just not a VC business.

3. You actually like your life

This sounds soft, but it's real. If you have a family, hobbies, or any interest in not working 80-hour weeks for 7 years, bootstrapping might be your path.

4. You want to control your destiny

With VC, you don't get to decide if you sell. You don't get to decide strategy. The board does. If that sounds fun to you, great. If it sounds like hell, don't raise.

5. You're okay with steady growth instead of hypergrowth

Growing 40-50% annually for 5 years takes you from $1M to $5-7M ARR. That's a $2-4M/year cash machine you own. But VCs would call that "slow growth." Your call.

The Founder Path Decision Tree

Here's how to think about your options:

 START: Have a business idea

│

├─ Can this realistically hit $100M+ ARR?

│  │

│  ├─ YES → Is the market ready NOW?

│  │  │

│  │  ├─ YES → Raise VC (if you want the pressure)

│  │  └─ NO → Bootstrap until timing is right

│  │

│  └─ NO → Can you hit $3-10M ARR profitably?

│     │

│     ├─ YES → Bootstrap or raise small capital

│     │         Own your company

│     │         Control your destiny

│     │         $500K-$3M/year in your pocket

│     │

│     └─ NO → Is this really a business or a service?

│        │

│        ├─ Service → Build it into a productized service

│        │            Then decide: stay service or go product?

│        │

│        └─ Not sure → Get to $100K ARR first

│                      Then reassess

The key insight: Most founders default to the VC path without considering alternatives.

They assume if they're "ambitious" they need to raise. But ambition can mean building a $10M ARR company you own 100% of just as easily as it can mean building a $100M company you own 15% of.

Do the math. $10M at 70% margins, 100% ownership = $7M/year to you. $100M at 40% margins, 15% ownership after dilution = $6M/year to you. Except the first path takes 5-7 years of sustainable building, and the second takes 10 years of hell with a 90% chance of failure.

The Bottom Line

The startup career nobody talks about is building a $3-10M ARR company that's profitable, sustainable, and actually enjoyable to run.

It won't get you on conference stages. TechCrunch won't write about you. VCs won't slide into your DMs.

But you'll make more money than 95% of VC-backed founders. You'll control your company. You'll work reasonable hours. You'll build something that lasts.

And weirdly, that's become the contrarian path.

So here's my question: What are you actually optimizing for? A headline? Or a business?

Because if it's the latter, there's a whole career path sitting in the middle that nobody's telling you about.

—Brendan Ward

P.S. - If you're currently raising and wondering if there's another way, there is. It's not for everyone, but it's not the "lifestyle business" people make it out to be either. It's just a different game with different rewards. Choose wisely.