I mostly agree with you, but I think there are two orthogonal angles worth considering. First of all, some startups foster a cult-like, work-together-play-toge

I mostly agree with you, but I think there are two orthogonal angles worth considering. First of all, some startups foster a cult-like, work-together-play-together environment where the pressure to overwork is subtly amped up as well since everyone spends all their time together. This kind of company is arguably exploiting young people's natural disposition and projected fantasies of success, although if they pay well and give above average equity then it could be more of a lifestyle choice than outright exploitation. It's also worth acknowledging that this kind of devotion can be a strong motivator that leads to high productivity. It's not necessarily the case that people have to work more because of mismanagement. The second angle is that business success has very little correlation to the efficiency of management. Fundamentally if you have a good business then you will make more money for less work than if you have a bad one. Having obsessed workaholic employees is a decent way to improve your chances, but it's no guarantee. Sometimes in a startup you have to do a death march to survive long enough to test a reasonable hypothesis, but if it becomes so ingrained in the culture that you're still doing it at a later stage, then that's a company I won't touch with a ten foot pole.