6 ms·

I've shunned founding startups or working at startups for the last ~3 years, and instead worked 15-20 hr/wk usually remotely. Time is your greatest asset, pers

I've shunned founding startups or working at startups for the last ~3 years, and instead worked 15-20 hr/wk usually remotely. Time is your greatest asset, personally and professionally. It's how you stay abreast of the great opportunities of our time. You need that freedom to explore things that pique your interest or move you. Founding a startup means becoming mostly blind to the other great opportunities, which is why I'm so reluctant to do a startup, unless I think it's "the one." IMO, the opportunity cost of startup jobs is far more sinister than you think. Only do it if you need the money or if you believe you're changing the world in the greatest way you can.

dudul 11y ago
What about founding a startup to try to make big money and then have the time to explore things?
- whiddershins 11y ago
  There's a poor risk/reward ratio there. It takes way too long for the average startup to be successful, and the overwhelming majority of them aren't successful enough to provide the economic freedom you are referring to. If you can love the chase of a startup, and love the thrill and long hours, great! If you are doing it so you can have "more free time later" there are many many better strategies.
  - todorstoyanov 11y ago
    Good point. Can you share some?
    - marvin 11y ago
      Here's one: Get a high-paying software job in a high COL area, work for a decade or so while minimizing your expenses (live cheaply/with friends) and investing as much as possible in a diversified stock market portfolio. Then when you're sick of it, move to a cheaper area, get a part-time job and sell 3-4% of your assets every year to make up for the deficit. If you're lucky, the safe withdrawal rate of 3-4% will even be enough (or close) to have the ability to quit working for a living completely. Or perhaps your part-time job can cover all your expenses and you can just keep letting your portfolio grow at the expected long-term rate of 6-7% per year.
      - maehwasu 11y ago
        Really good advice; this is what I tell everyone who has a high value skill like coding. The actual time frame is probably even shorter than 10 years if you are aggressive about saving.
      - Florin_Andrei 11y ago
        At what point during this sequence do you expect to have children? In what kind of area are you going to raise them?
        aianus 11y ago
        You don't have any... Having children is possibly the stupidest thing anyone could ever do (for their happiness or bank account).
        todorstoyanov 11y ago
        This is exactly my strategy. I'm a developer and I invest my savings. My three kids keeps my away of applying the rest of the strategy right now :)
        marvin 11y ago
        If you're happy with and able to have children after the 10 years of aggressive saving and investment, this strategy will also give you an extra financial buffer for raising kids. The basic strategy is not incompatible. But obviously, your total spending will increase, so you either have to earn more after having kids or save up more before having kids. If you want to raise your children in a high cost-of-living area, this will of course be even more pronounced.
    - cspags 11y ago
      Here's one good article I've read on achieving economic freedom: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-simple-math-behind-early-retirement/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-sim...
- gf1 11y ago
  There's still a massive risk. What if you put three years of your life into a startup that becomes defunct after all that time? Then you've lost three years of your life and have to go somewhere else. Sure, you gain knowledge and experience through that time, but joining another company would still take time to work your way through the ranks there. In that three years, you would've had a great head-start on both professional experience and financial health. Food for thought. Your statement just assumes the startup will do well and that's not a guarantee. There isn't a guarantee a company you work for will be around forever either, but the likelihood is far greater.
- orthoganol 11y ago
  1) low probability 2) even lower probability if you're an opportunist as described (note that smart investors like YC actively avoid them). 3) large minimum years investment required, especially if acquired or acqui-hired, maybe 4-10 years, during which you suffer the opportunity costs I described. 4) just easier to explore and be open to the rare opportunities, while still making decent money, by doing something like consulting at low hours. From this position you can always do a startup if you see something great.
sanderjd 11y ago
Out of curiosity: do you do contracting / consulting work, or have you found a stable 15-20 hr/wk job? I think the latter sounds excellent, while the former sounds stressful.
- binarysolo 11y ago
  1 datapoint: I was doing 15-20hr/wk consulting the past few years and making as much as my FT CTO/COO position now and the stress of constant sourcing definitely was stressful (but the extra hours and lifestyle of commandeering your schedule/location was a third dimension to optimize).
  - elliotec 11y ago
    How did you make that much? How often did you have to source contacts and how many did you take at a time, and for how long? I'm trying to do similar and am absorbing any input I can about this.
    - askafriend 11y ago
      If I had to guess, he probably billed by the hour at a certain rate and estimated timeframe but got the work done orders of magnitude faster so his effective per hour rate is orders of magnitude higher. E.g I tell you I am $50 an hour and the task will reasonably take 10 hours. However what you don't know is that I am extremely skilled at the task and have done it many times before so I can get it done faster than anyone else. I have frameworks already set up, and a lot of boiler plate infra from previous projects. So I get it done in 1hr. I am now effectively making $500 an hour.
      - nathan_f77 11y ago
        That's pretty dishonest. I would never charge like that. I would rather be completely upfront with a client and charge them $500 per hour for 1 hour, if I know that I can get it done that fast, and it's really providing that much value.
hellameta 11y ago
> which is why I'm so reluctant to do a startup, unless I think it's "the one." IYO indeed. That you have found your way of doing things is wonderful and also incredibly lucky. That you consider opportunity cost a universally objective measure is complete fantasy though. TL;DR: Always be highly skeptical of anyone claiming their way of life is the right way to live.
- orthoganol 11y ago
  I'm proposing a very general rule, certainly, but I think you would still agree there are better and worse ways of spending your time.
jerguismi 11y ago
Weird stance. Startups are not really about money. They are about greater risk. For a startup founder it is not unusual to spend a lot of time, and still make zero money. And it is also possible to spend only couple of years, and make so much money that you can leisurely work for couple of days a month, and go surfing for the rest of the month. And do that same thing for the rest of your life. As an employee you will surely make some money always, and only spend certain amount of time. As a freelancer/contractor typically your risk is a bit greater (you might not get good gigs or something), but as a reward you can earn more money for less time. So it is not about whether you value your time or money. It is about your risk appetite. It is not that uncommon to do this kind of "lifestyle business" thingie where the primary goal is freedom and time, not necessarily money.
- orthoganol 11y ago
  I'm not sure I understand your position. They entail risk, but they aren't motivated by risk, they don't exist because of risk. > Startups are not really about money I agree, > Only do it if... you believe you're changing the world in the greatest way you can They are about pursuing a vision. Even YC has said they dislike opportunists, and for good reasons (they make bad startups).
  - repomies691 11y ago
    I like opportunists, they don't necessarily make great startups, but ethical and hardworking opportunist usually does good for the world.
- coldtea 11y ago
  >So it is not about whether you value your time or money. It is about your risk appetite. It is not that uncommon to do this kind of "lifestyle business" thingie where the primary goal is freedom and time, not necessarily money. Why the condescending tone for those businesses? The main motivation behind startup is making loads of money. Similar to casino players, hoping to the big payoff. There's more risk of course, but that's not the motivation -- else startup founders would be as likely to be daredevils like Evel Knievel. Startups don't care much about the actual business aspects (actually making money from what they do) as much as getting VCs to pour money in and then exit. OTOH, the motivation between lifestyle business is not just freedom and time, but also the product. A custom motorcycle shop or some company making a software tool like BBEdit, for example, with extremely passionate people putting tons of hours into what they do, are "lifestyle businesses". Where in a "startup proper" a founder can be just as happy to sell their to some giant company that while close their main product (acquihires and tech acquisitions).
voltagex_ 11y ago
Being able to work remotely and at 20-40 hours a week would change my life - seriously. I know there is lots of information around on becoming a freelancer, but do you have any particular insights?
- lmm 11y ago
  Getting to 40 hours/week is trivial (or rather, the difficulty is all on the emotional side) - you walk out the door after 8 hours every day, and you do it consistently. Getting down to 20 is much harder, as is getting remote work - all I can suggest for that is being upfront about it, and only working in positions/contracts that are explicitly remote-first.
jasonkester 11y ago
From where I stand, it looks like you have your numbers backward. The reason you start a startup is so that you can work those 15-20 hour weeks (or less) without anybody giving you grief about it. Shipping software works just fine on a few hours a weeks. Maybe a quick burst up front to get v1 out the door, but then you can ramp it down as far as you want to go. I've gone entire months without opening the IDE for some of my paying products. The problem with client work is that as soon as you stop working, the client stops sending you money. SaaS doesn't work that way. Take advantage of that!
- orthoganol 11y ago
  Most would refer to what you describe as 'lifestyle business'. I mean 'startup' as the type of startup you would see come out of YC. You work really hard, all the time. Company culture is encompassing, which means employees sacrificing a lot of time and mindshare. As a founder it becomes the only thing you think about, for years. That's startups of the YC vein, and they only want to fund startups that work this way. (Take a look at Sam's 'How to Start a Startup' course if this doesn't ring familiar).
  - jasonkester 11y ago
    Indeed. That's the definition on paper, but it's your business so you get to run it how you like. There is surprisingly little correlation between hours worked and end result. I could have easily worked four years of 80 hour weeks, ruined all my relationships and given myself health issues building the product that pays my bills today. I can't imagine the monthly recurring revenue numbers would reflect that effort. It really is more calendar time and marketing that moves the needle. You can do that and still have plenty of time for product development working 10 hours a week. You can make up quaint terms for it, but really all that does is flag it in your mind as something that's not for you. You really need to be doing that 80 hour week boiler room thing, else you're not startupping enough. So you do, and you're unhappy. The end goal is to replace your salary by building a product. Call it a lifestyle business if you like. But be sure to do it.
    - 11y ago

dudul 11y ago

What about founding a startup to try to make big money and then have the time to explore things?

whiddershins 11y ago
There's a poor risk/reward ratio there. It takes way too long for the average startup to be successful, and the overwhelming majority of them aren't successful enough to provide the economic freedom you are referring to. If you can love the chase of a startup, and love the thrill and long hours, great! If you are doing it so you can have "more free time later" there are many many better strategies.
- todorstoyanov 11y ago
  Good point. Can you share some?
  - marvin 11y ago
    Here's one: Get a high-paying software job in a high COL area, work for a decade or so while minimizing your expenses (live cheaply/with friends) and investing as much as possible in a diversified stock market portfolio. Then when you're sick of it, move to a cheaper area, get a part-time job and sell 3-4% of your assets every year to make up for the deficit. If you're lucky, the safe withdrawal rate of 3-4% will even be enough (or close) to have the ability to quit working for a living completely. Or perhaps your part-time job can cover all your expenses and you can just keep letting your portfolio grow at the expected long-term rate of 6-7% per year.
    - maehwasu 11y ago
      Really good advice; this is what I tell everyone who has a high value skill like coding. The actual time frame is probably even shorter than 10 years if you are aggressive about saving.
    - Florin_Andrei 11y ago
      At what point during this sequence do you expect to have children? In what kind of area are you going to raise them?
      - aianus 11y ago
        You don't have any... Having children is possibly the stupidest thing anyone could ever do (for their happiness or bank account).
      - todorstoyanov 11y ago
        This is exactly my strategy. I'm a developer and I invest my savings. My three kids keeps my away of applying the rest of the strategy right now :)
      - marvin 11y ago
        If you're happy with and able to have children after the 10 years of aggressive saving and investment, this strategy will also give you an extra financial buffer for raising kids. The basic strategy is not incompatible. But obviously, your total spending will increase, so you either have to earn more after having kids or save up more before having kids. If you want to raise your children in a high cost-of-living area, this will of course be even more pronounced.
  - cspags 11y ago
    Here's one good article I've read on achieving economic freedom: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-simple-math-behind-early-retirement/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-sim...
gf1 11y ago
There's still a massive risk. What if you put three years of your life into a startup that becomes defunct after all that time? Then you've lost three years of your life and have to go somewhere else. Sure, you gain knowledge and experience through that time, but joining another company would still take time to work your way through the ranks there. In that three years, you would've had a great head-start on both professional experience and financial health. Food for thought. Your statement just assumes the startup will do well and that's not a guarantee. There isn't a guarantee a company you work for will be around forever either, but the likelihood is far greater.
orthoganol 11y ago
1) low probability 2) even lower probability if you're an opportunist as described (note that smart investors like YC actively avoid them). 3) large minimum years investment required, especially if acquired or acqui-hired, maybe 4-10 years, during which you suffer the opportunity costs I described. 4) just easier to explore and be open to the rare opportunities, while still making decent money, by doing something like consulting at low hours. From this position you can always do a startup if you see something great.

sanderjd 11y ago

Out of curiosity: do you do contracting / consulting work, or have you found a stable 15-20 hr/wk job? I think the latter sounds excellent, while the former sounds stressful.

binarysolo 11y ago
1 datapoint: I was doing 15-20hr/wk consulting the past few years and making as much as my FT CTO/COO position now and the stress of constant sourcing definitely was stressful (but the extra hours and lifestyle of commandeering your schedule/location was a third dimension to optimize).
- elliotec 11y ago
  How did you make that much? How often did you have to source contacts and how many did you take at a time, and for how long? I'm trying to do similar and am absorbing any input I can about this.
  - askafriend 11y ago
    If I had to guess, he probably billed by the hour at a certain rate and estimated timeframe but got the work done orders of magnitude faster so his effective per hour rate is orders of magnitude higher. E.g I tell you I am $50 an hour and the task will reasonably take 10 hours. However what you don't know is that I am extremely skilled at the task and have done it many times before so I can get it done faster than anyone else. I have frameworks already set up, and a lot of boiler plate infra from previous projects. So I get it done in 1hr. I am now effectively making $500 an hour.
    - nathan_f77 11y ago
      That's pretty dishonest. I would never charge like that. I would rather be completely upfront with a client and charge them $500 per hour for 1 hour, if I know that I can get it done that fast, and it's really providing that much value.

hellameta 11y ago

> which is why I'm so reluctant to do a startup, unless I think it's "the one." IYO indeed. That you have found your way of doing things is wonderful and also incredibly lucky. That you consider opportunity cost a universally objective measure is complete fantasy though. TL;DR: Always be highly skeptical of anyone claiming their way of life is the right way to live.

orthoganol 11y ago
I'm proposing a very general rule, certainly, but I think you would still agree there are better and worse ways of spending your time.

jerguismi 11y ago

Weird stance. Startups are not really about money. They are about greater risk. For a startup founder it is not unusual to spend a lot of time, and still make zero money. And it is also possible to spend only couple of years, and make so much money that you can leisurely work for couple of days a month, and go surfing for the rest of the month. And do that same thing for the rest of your life. As an employee you will surely make some money always, and only spend certain amount of time. As a freelancer/contractor typically your risk is a bit greater (you might not get good gigs or something), but as a reward you can earn more money for less time. So it is not about whether you value your time or money. It is about your risk appetite. It is not that uncommon to do this kind of "lifestyle business" thingie where the primary goal is freedom and time, not necessarily money.

orthoganol 11y ago
I'm not sure I understand your position. They entail risk, but they aren't motivated by risk, they don't exist because of risk. > Startups are not really about money I agree, > Only do it if... you believe you're changing the world in the greatest way you can They are about pursuing a vision. Even YC has said they dislike opportunists, and for good reasons (they make bad startups).
- repomies691 11y ago
  I like opportunists, they don't necessarily make great startups, but ethical and hardworking opportunist usually does good for the world.
coldtea 11y ago
>So it is not about whether you value your time or money. It is about your risk appetite. It is not that uncommon to do this kind of "lifestyle business" thingie where the primary goal is freedom and time, not necessarily money. Why the condescending tone for those businesses? The main motivation behind startup is making loads of money. Similar to casino players, hoping to the big payoff. There's more risk of course, but that's not the motivation -- else startup founders would be as likely to be daredevils like Evel Knievel. Startups don't care much about the actual business aspects (actually making money from what they do) as much as getting VCs to pour money in and then exit. OTOH, the motivation between lifestyle business is not just freedom and time, but also the product. A custom motorcycle shop or some company making a software tool like BBEdit, for example, with extremely passionate people putting tons of hours into what they do, are "lifestyle businesses". Where in a "startup proper" a founder can be just as happy to sell their to some giant company that while close their main product (acquihires and tech acquisitions).

voltagex_ 11y ago

Being able to work remotely and at 20-40 hours a week would change my life - seriously. I know there is lots of information around on becoming a freelancer, but do you have any particular insights?

lmm 11y ago
Getting to 40 hours/week is trivial (or rather, the difficulty is all on the emotional side) - you walk out the door after 8 hours every day, and you do it consistently. Getting down to 20 is much harder, as is getting remote work - all I can suggest for that is being upfront about it, and only working in positions/contracts that are explicitly remote-first.

jasonkester 11y ago

From where I stand, it looks like you have your numbers backward. The reason you start a startup is so that you can work those 15-20 hour weeks (or less) without anybody giving you grief about it. Shipping software works just fine on a few hours a weeks. Maybe a quick burst up front to get v1 out the door, but then you can ramp it down as far as you want to go. I've gone entire months without opening the IDE for some of my paying products. The problem with client work is that as soon as you stop working, the client stops sending you money. SaaS doesn't work that way. Take advantage of that!

orthoganol 11y ago
Most would refer to what you describe as 'lifestyle business'. I mean 'startup' as the type of startup you would see come out of YC. You work really hard, all the time. Company culture is encompassing, which means employees sacrificing a lot of time and mindshare. As a founder it becomes the only thing you think about, for years. That's startups of the YC vein, and they only want to fund startups that work this way. (Take a look at Sam's 'How to Start a Startup' course if this doesn't ring familiar).
- jasonkester 11y ago
  Indeed. That's the definition on paper, but it's your business so you get to run it how you like. There is surprisingly little correlation between hours worked and end result. I could have easily worked four years of 80 hour weeks, ruined all my relationships and given myself health issues building the product that pays my bills today. I can't imagine the monthly recurring revenue numbers would reflect that effort. It really is more calendar time and marketing that moves the needle. You can do that and still have plenty of time for product development working 10 hours a week. You can make up quaint terms for it, but really all that does is flag it in your mind as something that's not for you. You really need to be doing that 80 hour week boiler room thing, else you're not startupping enough. So you do, and you're unhappy. The end goal is to replace your salary by building a product. Call it a lifestyle business if you like. But be sure to do it.
  - 11y ago