Tomas Tunguz is oft quoted here. We like Tomas - he talks a lot of sense and much of it is well argued, highly analytical stuff. His argument here though I am less fond of. He basically says that a business in a bust should have the same sound fundamentals as a business in a boom.
Sounds good, sort of and maybe.
I've gone bust in a bust and I've survived in a bust and it had 'not a lot' to do with business fundamentals.
In a B2B scenario, in a bust, your customers go bust or struggle badly. It doesn't matter how good your business is, they may well "need" to end their commitment to you (or at least to someone).
The difference was that in the second case, when we survived, we had bullet proof contracts and a very good legal team.
So when the world collapsed, as it did in 2008, we survived. We didn't get dumped by panicking Finance Directors. And having survived, we came out much stronger, as indeed did our clients.
The lesson is have solid long term contracts, maybe that is a business fundamental - but it only really matters in the bad times.
All of these activities are things great startups do anyway, in any environment: think long term, manage cash well, build the best product, hire the right team and provide customers value. No one knows if there’s a bubble or if/when our presumed bubble will pop. The best we can do is build startups using sound principles and disciplined decision-making, with the aim of building sustainable, defensible businesses. Whether or not we’re in a bubble shouldn’t change those core tenets. So if we’re abiding by those principles, the question of are we in a bubble doesn’t really matter.