4 ms·

The guy is a doctor enrolled in YC. I doubt he'll end up on the street if his startup fails. A large part of other founders are engineers that can walk into a s

The guy is a doctor enrolled in YC. I doubt he'll end up on the street if his startup fails. A large part of other founders are engineers that can walk into a six figure job on relatively little notice. For all the talk of risking everything, most founders risk time and foregone salary, but not their future. If microsoft had failed, Bill Gates would have re-enrolled at Harvard and graduated a little late. Your average Joe or Jane that dreams of owning a coffee shop and has to put up their own capital is another story.

enraged_camel 9y ago
>>For all the talk of risking everything, most founders risk time and foregone salary, but not their future. Not always true. Missed salaries (and therefore savings) early in life translate to massive losses later when you take into account lost compound interest over 30+ years. The other thing is that working insane hours to get a startup off the ground can cause depression, burnout, a host of health problems, etc. Some people never recover from these regardless of their credentials or any additional opportunities they come across.
Xylakant 9y ago
You’re inadvertently making the parents posters point. The reason why most founders stem from a demographic that allows them to either find a solid paying job or fall back on (parents, spouses, ...) financial support is that he current way of doing startups selects harshly for exactly this. No one else can afford that risk and gamble. If you’re single, your startup fails and you have to move in to your parents place for a while, that’s tough luck. If you have a family, a few kids and maybe parents that rely on your financial support, a single dry month without income may spell disaster. The current way of doing things self-selects for types willing to put in crazy hours and with access to money.
- samolang 9y ago
  > The current way of doing things Is there a realistic alternative? Sure, universal basic income eventually, but that's not practical at the moment.
  - eni 9y ago
    Is there a realistic alternative? I read a lot on entrepreneurship during 19th century and early 20th century US. My limited understanding: in those days entrepreneurs came from much wider range of demographics. In other words, entry barriers were much less during those days.
    - samolang 9y ago
      I mean many people start bodegas, restaurants, etc. I imagine that's more akin to 19th century entrepreneurship and still is by far the most prevalent form of entrepreneurship today (only like 1.3% of businesses are created in the Bay area and 1.1% of the population lives there).
  - eecc 9y ago
    Scandinavian countries? Entrepreneurship thrives when you can afford to try without risking absolutely everything. See: https://www.inc.com/magazine/20110201/in-norway-start-ups-say-ja-to-socialism.html https://www.inc.com/magazine/20110201/in-norway-start-ups-sa...
- eni 9y ago
  Very good observations. I think it partly explains why innovation is so hard in places where people live hand to mouth. It is simply excludes those demographics from participating in innovation and changing status quo.
- ikurei 9y ago
  This just in: having kids reduces your life-maneuverability, precluding you from embarking in some kinds of projects! :P > If you have a family, a few kids and maybe parents that rely on your financial support, a single dry month without income may spell disaster. Sounds like you are asking for all companies to be stable and reliable sources of income. That wouldn't make any sense. I actually agree with a lot of what you're saying. I'm working at a non-SV start up, and we've made many efforts to create a "normal" work environment: paying everyone at least enough to stay alive and out of debt, leaving at 5 and trying to reduce the ammount of extra-time people have to put in... But we also realize the ways in which this is limits us, and I totally understand that when someone needs a breakthrough innovation or to fix a very hard problem, extraordinary sacrifices may have to be made. I know other startups working in the more SV/crunch style and honestly it probably makes sense for them. Being willing to go this far for what you believe (or may be for the money you expect to make) has value. Being able to go this far of course is very dependent on your lot in life (which is something we should work against, with a social safety net that enables people from all wealth levels), and also on the decisions you made before (like having kids; which I don't know we can be doing all that much about). (I hope I made any sense, mondays are bad for my english-writing skills.)
cinbun8 9y ago
Agreed. When I quit my day job to start a company, I had savings to last me another 2 years. My plan B was to get back into a 9-5 job if things didn't pan out. You do hear horror stories (like that indie developer who quit his day job to make a game and went broke), but that has more to do with little to no planning for plan B.
- devonkim 9y ago
  Being able to save for 2 years alone is a massive endeavor for most people. This usually means one or more of: 1. living far below means for years 2. delaying life events (marriage, house, grad school, etc.) 3. having low enough unexpected expenses to make that fund last for 2 years. I basically couldn't make it work for various reasons related to being married and needing to have some health insurance that costs over $1.1k / mo. Meanwhile, if my spouse has the privilege of a job with decent health insurance, the expense plummets to $400 / mo which makes a huge difference. The more realistic route for most people is to work part-time on your projects perhaps taking years longer than if you were to have quit and worked full-time and to quit your job when one of them pans out to being viable. This approach tends to work substantially better for non-business ventures like writing, performance art, etc. Look at all the middle-class / lower income writers that worked awful jobs for years to make ends meet but kept writing. Most of them had 9-to-5 jobs but for a lot of software jobs that pay into the six figure range, they are far, far more demanding of you mentally than waiting tables (although physical exhaustion absolutely affects mental ability, too). This level of work, however, is probably what it takes to be an entrepreneur without much means given that even those with means oftentimes have to work so much for even a small chance at a business opportunity.

enraged_camel 9y ago

>>For all the talk of risking everything, most founders risk time and foregone salary, but not their future. Not always true. Missed salaries (and therefore savings) early in life translate to massive losses later when you take into account lost compound interest over 30+ years. The other thing is that working insane hours to get a startup off the ground can cause depression, burnout, a host of health problems, etc. Some people never recover from these regardless of their credentials or any additional opportunities they come across.

Xylakant 9y ago

You’re inadvertently making the parents posters point. The reason why most founders stem from a demographic that allows them to either find a solid paying job or fall back on (parents, spouses, ...) financial support is that he current way of doing startups selects harshly for exactly this. No one else can afford that risk and gamble. If you’re single, your startup fails and you have to move in to your parents place for a while, that’s tough luck. If you have a family, a few kids and maybe parents that rely on your financial support, a single dry month without income may spell disaster. The current way of doing things self-selects for types willing to put in crazy hours and with access to money.

samolang 9y ago
> The current way of doing things Is there a realistic alternative? Sure, universal basic income eventually, but that's not practical at the moment.
- eni 9y ago
  Is there a realistic alternative? I read a lot on entrepreneurship during 19th century and early 20th century US. My limited understanding: in those days entrepreneurs came from much wider range of demographics. In other words, entry barriers were much less during those days.
  - samolang 9y ago
    I mean many people start bodegas, restaurants, etc. I imagine that's more akin to 19th century entrepreneurship and still is by far the most prevalent form of entrepreneurship today (only like 1.3% of businesses are created in the Bay area and 1.1% of the population lives there).
- eecc 9y ago
  Scandinavian countries? Entrepreneurship thrives when you can afford to try without risking absolutely everything. See: https://www.inc.com/magazine/20110201/in-norway-start-ups-say-ja-to-socialism.html https://www.inc.com/magazine/20110201/in-norway-start-ups-sa...
eni 9y ago
Very good observations. I think it partly explains why innovation is so hard in places where people live hand to mouth. It is simply excludes those demographics from participating in innovation and changing status quo.
ikurei 9y ago
This just in: having kids reduces your life-maneuverability, precluding you from embarking in some kinds of projects! :P > If you have a family, a few kids and maybe parents that rely on your financial support, a single dry month without income may spell disaster. Sounds like you are asking for all companies to be stable and reliable sources of income. That wouldn't make any sense. I actually agree with a lot of what you're saying. I'm working at a non-SV start up, and we've made many efforts to create a "normal" work environment: paying everyone at least enough to stay alive and out of debt, leaving at 5 and trying to reduce the ammount of extra-time people have to put in... But we also realize the ways in which this is limits us, and I totally understand that when someone needs a breakthrough innovation or to fix a very hard problem, extraordinary sacrifices may have to be made. I know other startups working in the more SV/crunch style and honestly it probably makes sense for them. Being willing to go this far for what you believe (or may be for the money you expect to make) has value. Being able to go this far of course is very dependent on your lot in life (which is something we should work against, with a social safety net that enables people from all wealth levels), and also on the decisions you made before (like having kids; which I don't know we can be doing all that much about). (I hope I made any sense, mondays are bad for my english-writing skills.)

cinbun8 9y ago

Agreed. When I quit my day job to start a company, I had savings to last me another 2 years. My plan B was to get back into a 9-5 job if things didn't pan out. You do hear horror stories (like that indie developer who quit his day job to make a game and went broke), but that has more to do with little to no planning for plan B.

devonkim 9y ago
Being able to save for 2 years alone is a massive endeavor for most people. This usually means one or more of: 1. living far below means for years 2. delaying life events (marriage, house, grad school, etc.) 3. having low enough unexpected expenses to make that fund last for 2 years. I basically couldn't make it work for various reasons related to being married and needing to have some health insurance that costs over $1.1k / mo. Meanwhile, if my spouse has the privilege of a job with decent health insurance, the expense plummets to $400 / mo which makes a huge difference. The more realistic route for most people is to work part-time on your projects perhaps taking years longer than if you were to have quit and worked full-time and to quit your job when one of them pans out to being viable. This approach tends to work substantially better for non-business ventures like writing, performance art, etc. Look at all the middle-class / lower income writers that worked awful jobs for years to make ends meet but kept writing. Most of them had 9-to-5 jobs but for a lot of software jobs that pay into the six figure range, they are far, far more demanding of you mentally than waiting tables (although physical exhaustion absolutely affects mental ability, too). This level of work, however, is probably what it takes to be an entrepreneur without much means given that even those with means oftentimes have to work so much for even a small chance at a business opportunity.