3 ms·
I think the real question is "does the existence of unicorns provide an incentive to the average founder?", and I'd say that question's a lot less definitive.
by vec 11y ago
I think the real question is "does the existence of unicorns provide an incentive to the average founder?", and I'd say that question's a lot less definitive.
Sure, some founders have gotten filthy stinkin' rich off their startups, but those are lottery-ticket odds. Most founders seem to be aiming for either a self-sustaining small business or an acqui-hire, both of which are middle- to upper-middle-class career paths, but neither are by and large own-your-own-helicopter-class career paths.
- Kalium 11y agoI think you may have overlooked the power of optimistic biases. A fair number of young founders do believe they stand a good chance of becoming very much upper class and base their financial decisions on this. Failing that, some people are willing to play lottery-ticket odds even with full appreciation of the risks. That said, I think the answer hold even if you restrict the question to small self-sustaining lifestyle-businesses-size. You correctly state that there is no way of knowing how big a company will get at founding time. However, if there's an upper limit, then this may significantly affect risk evaluation. People will respond to the incentives they see, and you can't kill the incentives without affecting how people behave.