7 ms·

This is an excellent example of why startups are dominated by the young, single, affluent. They have nearly nothing to lose. The rest of us do. "If the compan

This is an excellent example of why startups are dominated by the young, single, affluent. They have nearly nothing to lose. The rest of us do. "If the company goes poof, we are individually liable for the debts," Wayne explained. "Jobs and Wozniak didn't have two nickels to rub together. I had a house, and a bank account, and a car… I was reachable!"

nkassis 11y ago
It seems that the average age of startup founders is actually 40 according to this article: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/235357 http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/235357 I can see why, by then you get some financial stability and kids get older, a good amount of experience etc...
- mikeash 11y ago
  It seems like a different environment now. The debt here sounds like a bank loan or something along those lines where they expected to get paid back in cash. These days, it's more likely to be a VC investment or a Kickstarter or something else where there's no debt created and the people giving the money are just buying some sort of share in the company's potential success.
  - takno 11y ago
    It is better, but it's difficult to guarantee that the company will never go through a stage where a personally-guaranteed overdraft is the best option. At least in the UK these are usually jointly and severally repayable by the founders. At that point I'd far rather be the founder in my early 20s with nothing but debt than the one with the house who is going to end up homeless.
  - digi_owl 11y ago
    I wonder if back then was better than it is now. The whole VC thing seems to lead to a whole lot of pump and dump schemes. It, and going public, seem to lead to a whole lot of short term thinking.
spacecowboy_lon 11y ago
Was not Apple incorporated as a limited liability company which limits your losses?
- TheBiv 11y ago
  I don't know the specifics, but it may not have been officially incorporated yet.
- linkregister 11y ago
  Very often lenders will refuse to issue loans to the LLC, instead requiring company officers to take loans out in their name so a lender can be made whole in the event of default.
- manarth 11y ago
  It's very common with "Close companies" (companies that are owned and run by a small number of people) that banks require the directors/owners to act as a personal guarantor on company loans. Without that, it would be quite legal for the directors to take a whopping loan, pay themselves a whopping salary/bonus, then have the company go bankrupt without recourse to the bank. Rinse, repeat, profit.
  - dboreham 11y ago
    You're talking about PE firms, right?
  - CamperBob2 11y ago
    Rinse, repeat, profit. That "repeat" part is where this plan goes off the rails. You can fool your creditors once, but then the word gets around.
    - kevin_thibedeau 11y ago
      Unless you're Trump.
- marme 11y ago
1123581321 11y ago
Having nothing to lose means being not affluent. Wayne quit because he had resources that Jobs+Woz didn't.
- CamperBob2 11y ago
  Just goes to reinforce an old truth -- that people are never as greedy as when they're defending what they currently have.

nkassis 11y ago

It seems that the average age of startup founders is actually 40 according to this article: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/235357 http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/235357 I can see why, by then you get some financial stability and kids get older, a good amount of experience etc...

mikeash 11y ago
It seems like a different environment now. The debt here sounds like a bank loan or something along those lines where they expected to get paid back in cash. These days, it's more likely to be a VC investment or a Kickstarter or something else where there's no debt created and the people giving the money are just buying some sort of share in the company's potential success.
- takno 11y ago
  It is better, but it's difficult to guarantee that the company will never go through a stage where a personally-guaranteed overdraft is the best option. At least in the UK these are usually jointly and severally repayable by the founders. At that point I'd far rather be the founder in my early 20s with nothing but debt than the one with the house who is going to end up homeless.
- digi_owl 11y ago
  I wonder if back then was better than it is now. The whole VC thing seems to lead to a whole lot of pump and dump schemes. It, and going public, seem to lead to a whole lot of short term thinking.

spacecowboy_lon 11y ago

Was not Apple incorporated as a limited liability company which limits your losses?

TheBiv 11y ago
I don't know the specifics, but it may not have been officially incorporated yet.
linkregister 11y ago
Very often lenders will refuse to issue loans to the LLC, instead requiring company officers to take loans out in their name so a lender can be made whole in the event of default.
manarth 11y ago
It's very common with "Close companies" (companies that are owned and run by a small number of people) that banks require the directors/owners to act as a personal guarantor on company loans. Without that, it would be quite legal for the directors to take a whopping loan, pay themselves a whopping salary/bonus, then have the company go bankrupt without recourse to the bank. Rinse, repeat, profit.
- dboreham 11y ago
  You're talking about PE firms, right?
- CamperBob2 11y ago
  Rinse, repeat, profit. That "repeat" part is where this plan goes off the rails. You can fool your creditors once, but then the word gets around.
  - kevin_thibedeau 11y ago
    Unless you're Trump.
marme 11y ago

1123581321 11y ago

Having nothing to lose means being not affluent. Wayne quit because he had resources that Jobs+Woz didn't.

CamperBob2 11y ago
Just goes to reinforce an old truth -- that people are never as greedy as when they're defending what they currently have.