Without knowing the technology, costs, circumstances, etc, this is very naive to say. Don't armchair quarterback unless you understand all the circumstances.
Edit: And I got downvoted. I guess armchair quarterbacking is the right thing to do around these parts.
you have a big legal problem, either you shut down and discharge all the assets (sold or destroyed), or you keep the company alive and then you have to have a talk to your investors.
Startup owners in exchange for creditability had to give time - thats one of the main currencies in this scene. In this case I wont trust them from now on expecting them to do the same with any other new startup they will launch in future...
> Startup owners in exchange for creditability had to give time - thats one of the main currencies in this scene. In this case I wont trust them from now on expecting them to do the same with any other new startup they will launch in future...
Yeah, that's not how it works.
Committing time and money to a failed venture is the biggest mistake an entrepreneur can make.
That's really easy to say when you're not the one who is paying for it.
This is pretty typical. Every single business owner out there knows that the non-paying users generate more noise and complaints than an average paying customer.
The bullshit 'reputation' angle you are playing is a total non-sense.
Tell that to Max Levchin and 99% of other entrepreneurs that had to fail and fail hard prior to actually making it. I'm sure their 'reputation' is ruined.
Why not putting this on one Linode instance or Amazon Cloud, pay $50 a month and keep free users by offering premium $1/mo package to some of them?
But no, its easier to shut down. Less hassle, right?