Investment attraction is often used as a core benchmark to gauge a startup’s capability and growth potential. Regardless of the detailed contents of the business, the amount raised and the valuation achieved provide one of the most intuitive indicators of a company’s growth trajectory. Based on this, we implicitly judge whether a company is “doing well” or not. Because of this, many consider fundraising to be an indispensable requirement for startup creation — but that isn’t necessarily the case. Organic growth based on a bootstrap strategy is also possible.
The term bootstrap originates from the expression “to pull yourself up by your bootstraps,” and refers to a way of running a business by generating revenue internally without large external investment. In simple terms, it means earning your own way and securing the capital you need for growth. Given the high level of technological development required in today’s startup ecosystem, it might seem doubtful or vague whether this is truly possible. Still, depending on the founder’s business idea, business model, and management philosophy, a bootstrap strategy might actually be a better fit.
When practicing bootstrap management, the period right after the idea stage — when there is no revenue and cash inflows are limited — is likely to feel the most overwhelming. However, South Korea has one of the most developed startup support systems in the world. By fully leveraging government commercialization and technology development support programs, some burden can be alleviated. Notable programs include Youth Startup Academy and Startup Package for commercialization support, and the Didimdol Startup Growth Technology Development Project for tech development support. By linking with government projects, resources necessary to develop an initial prototype can be partially secured.
After this initial phase, it becomes crucial to transition quickly to revenue realization, thereby reducing dependence on government support programs. Currently, many large companies and public institutions are aggressively adopting super-gap technologies and pursuing artificial intelligence transformation (AX). To do this, they are actively seeking startups with which they can collaborate — which is why various open innovation and PoC (Proof of Concept) programs exist. In the B2B (business-to-business) and B2G (business-to-government) spaces, securing sales channels not only generates revenue but also builds valuable business references, laying a solid foundation for bootstrap management.
To achieve stable organic growth beyond mere survival, predictable cash flow must be established. One of the reasons it is difficult to secure a self-sustaining business model is that costs such as labor are fixed, while revenue tends to be selective. Therefore, when signing contracts, founders must assign payment timing by considering monthly cash inflows and outflows, and work to increase the portion of recurring subscription revenue. Through systematic cash management, startups can reduce the risk of “cash flow blockage” and also design reinvestment plans for continuous growth.
In the case of Antock — the company I lead — we have grown for the past decade based on a bootstrap model, which is rare for a fintech company. Having undergone this process, I know how difficult it is to build an organic foundation without external investment. It is slow, lonely, and demanding work — yet the advantages are very clear. Because ownership is not diluted, decisions about growth and change can be made freely. Even in volatile technological environments, or in market conditions where investment dries up (as in prolonged investment winter periods), we were able to maintain strategic direction with composure.
This is not to argue that the bootstrap approach is superior to fundraising. Rather, my point is that fundraising is not the only means or a mandatory prerequisite for startup success. Therefore, instead of insisting solely on investment attraction, founders should consider their own characteristics, the type of service, and how their revenue is generated — since an organic business model can be a meaningful alternative. Moreover, if the business can flexibly adopt both approaches in response to industry trends, a startup’s development path becomes more diversified, and it can secure a more advantageous position for growth.
