3 ms·

Could someone help me understand her list under Point 2, Stay Focused? She writes: >One of the most conspicuous patterns we’ve seen among the thousand startup

Could someone help me understand her list under Point 2, Stay Focused? She writes: >One of the most conspicuous patterns we’ve seen among the thousand startups we’ve funded is that the most successful founders are always totally focused on their product and their users. To the point of being fanatical. The best founders don’t have time to get caught up in other things. >Here’s a list of things that I see easily distract founders. These are like the startup equivalent of wolves in sheeps’ clothing. [she includes 8 points, of which I quote 4 below - I am quoting selectively.] > - “Grabbing coffee” with investors > - Networking > - Doing a “partnership,” thinking it will get you more users > - Going to conferences Now, I need help understnanding this. She has listed some of the items that separate people building startups in unfundable locations where there are 0 startups, and startups building in the Bay Area. If you don't need to do these things, why did YC shut down it's Boston program and make everyone do it in the Bay Area? If you don't need to do these things, why can't you build a startup from anywhere in the world as long as you speak good English and have no costs? Aren't these things literally the things that make startups fundable, financiable, possible to grow into huge businesses? I and anyone else on HN who has been in the Bay Area and in startup-dead locations knows the huge difference. She seemed to quote some of it under 'distractions'. Can someone help me understand why they aren't, in fact, part of focus?

ap22213 10y ago
Having failed because of some of those reasons, I think it's because those activities are very time-consuming and distract from being fanatical about the product. It would be different if they were fruitful, but more often (in my experience) they are dead-ends, and worse they spawn other activities that are dead-ends. It becomes a huge time sink. That said, it seems difficult to make legit connections without having them initially. Where I live, there are a few major companies that had succeeded decades ago, and most of the startups in the city seem to be run by ex-employees of those companies. I think the advantages of living in the bay are 1) more opportunity to bump into someone who knows someone, and 2) having access to more (passionate and active) early adopters.
- logicallee 10y ago
  I think I misread it. She actually said: >The best founders don’t have time to get caught up in other things. >Here’s a list of things that I see easily distract founders. So if you don't get "caught up" in it it's important; while they can "easily distract" founders, they're important. I think she might have gone too far stating that they're the startup equivalent of "wolves in sheeps’ clothing", because wolves in sheeps clothing presumably are only out to hurt you - but read this way her point comes across well. Spending too much time with them ends up hurting you, even though they can be important. I mean one of them is Networking... try building a startup without that.

ap22213 10y ago

Having failed because of some of those reasons, I think it's because those activities are very time-consuming and distract from being fanatical about the product. It would be different if they were fruitful, but more often (in my experience) they are dead-ends, and worse they spawn other activities that are dead-ends. It becomes a huge time sink. That said, it seems difficult to make legit connections without having them initially. Where I live, there are a few major companies that had succeeded decades ago, and most of the startups in the city seem to be run by ex-employees of those companies. I think the advantages of living in the bay are 1) more opportunity to bump into someone who knows someone, and 2) having access to more (passionate and active) early adopters.

logicallee 10y ago
I think I misread it. She actually said: >The best founders don’t have time to get caught up in other things. >Here’s a list of things that I see easily distract founders. So if you don't get "caught up" in it it's important; while they can "easily distract" founders, they're important. I think she might have gone too far stating that they're the startup equivalent of "wolves in sheeps’ clothing", because wolves in sheeps clothing presumably are only out to hurt you - but read this way her point comes across well. Spending too much time with them ends up hurting you, even though they can be important. I mean one of them is Networking... try building a startup without that.