It seems like the only reason these companies shut down is when everyone finally turns them away from securing more funding and the founders post a sad LinkedIn message about how today was the last day of operations at Beepboopbop. As a founder, wouldn’t your reputation be left more intact by being proactive about an unavoidable outcome? Going to the investors and outlining that some of the assumptions you made were wrong, the growth never happened despite all that you did, and this one didn’t turn out the way you thought?
I think doing this is looked at as “giving up” in the VC world however, and you you will be written off as not being “obsessed” enough about the problem, or you that you just didn’t have what it took and you’re not the next Steve Jobs.
Why does this happen? Isn’t the entire goal of a small company with a goal to become a business just to do that as quickly as possible? Most of the time the answer will be no, but that’s not necessarily a failure if you got to that understanding quickly and without wasting an enormous amount of money which seems like is the opposite of what’s happening now where the company is literally forced to shut down after wasting as much money and time as possible.
There's also the fact that failing companies can turn everything around and be a success. Hope is what keeps most founders moving forward. There have been so many cases where people started companies where everyone around thought that it was crazy to continue. Apple is a prime example. It was on its last legs in the late nineties. It made sense to quit at the time but it came back to be a powerhouse.