Very good post-mortem but left me with questions:<p>1. Raised $2.9m, 4 employees, 5 years. Let's say 2/3 of overhead was salary, which seems reasonable. So that's 500k each, or 100k/yr. This seems excessive? Were the founders paying themselves too much? Or where did the money go?<p>2. Difficulty in hiring. This seems very much attributable with the company's proximity to the SF black hole. Was relocation never even considered? And why was remote not considered? I would have liked to hear the reasons for those decisions.<p>All the points about potential recruits demanding "sexy" jobs or wanting to see high growth and large rounds seem pretty much exclusively SF problems. It seems like moving literally anywhere else would have solved this.<p>3. What is the actual reason for closing down? Out of money, or out of confidence? If my salary numbers above are wrong - and I should hope they are - maybe they still have a mil or so left, which seems like enough runway to take a stab at least some of the problems.<p>There were two seemingly contradictory considerations: lack of ability to iterate fast enough, and a realisation that the product was not viable. I would have liked to hear more about this too - iterating faster on the wrong thing would not have helped.<p>4. I know it's too late but even as an IT type when I look at the landing page I have very little idea what the product even does. A lot of features and use cases listed but what is the product and how does it solve any problem? There's a single screenshot four page heights down which looks like some kind of spreadsheet. It's not nearly enough.<p>Still, an honest, insightful and heartfelt piece and I wish the team good luck.