4 ms·

Looking at the first row, I'd just point out that some of these are repeat founders at the ages listed: Elon founded Zip2 right out of undergrad, Garrett Camp

by alehul 8y ago

Looking at the first row, I'd just point out that some of these are repeat founders at the ages listed: Elon founded Zip2 right out of undergrad, Garrett Camp founded StumbleUpon while in grad school, and Kalanick left UCLA undergrad to found Scour and then kind of expanded on that with Red Swoosh right after. Most of these are still accurate and it's really cool data, so thank you for posting; just figured it was worth commenting on nonetheless. :)

hacker_user 8y ago
Exactly. The list consists of the successful startups that they founded, but not the ones that they tried and failed at before finding success. I'd like to think that most successful founders fail at their first few not so noteworthy "side-projects" before finding success and sticking to it. Just building a crappy version of something not-so-cool can teach you a lot about tech, business and design, which then helps you build better products in the future.
replicatorblog 8y ago
This is important. There's a big difference between getting started at 45 and founding your third company at 45. I don't think there is something biological, or even social that makes it hard to be a late-bloomer in tech entrepreneurship. It's just hard to develop an entirely new skillset and network in later-middle age. I think we'd mostly be skeptical of a doctor who started medical school at 45, and while the stakes for founders aren't as severe, the same principle applies.
- tensor 8y ago
  Well, we'd be even more skeptical of a doctor who dropped out of undergrad, never got a degree, and was promising world changing results, which is the prevailing narrative Silicon Valley seems to want to believe.
  - taneq 8y ago
    There's an important difference between "dropped out of undergrad because you were failing" and "quit your course because your company succeeded so hard that finishing your course was irrelevant." You probably wouldn't be sceptical of a managing director of a medical research company who'd dropped out of med school when they reached 10+ employees.
    - tensor 8y ago
      I would be very skeptical actually. I might point to Theranos as an example of just what you describe too.
      - taneq 8y ago
        Given how many people believed in Theranos I think it's fair to say that their founder was pretty credible, despite the ultimate outcome.
- jt2190 8y ago
  > It's just hard to develop an entirely new skillset and network in later-middle age. To leave age out of it, the study shows that those who successfully founded growth companies already had the skillset and network to draw on. (Perhaps the older ages were due to the years it takes for someone build their skillset and network?)
adventured 8y ago
The idea is that the life experience you accumulate - and everything that goes with that - is often extremely valuable, critical to success. Zip2 got Musk started, it no doubt helped him accumulate experience and connections to start and run later ventures - training wheels for what came later. Musk could build Zip2 at 24. I would say there's zero chance he could have successfully built Tesla or SpaceX at 24 (ignoring the capital requirements). I think that far more often than not, to start and build great companies, requires a small lifetime of accumulated experience and mistakes. The media myth of the tech industry and its important companies being founded by 19 year old Zuckerbergs, is just that, a myth. The media loves that story because it sells, it's just not real.

by alehul 8y ago

hacker_user 8y ago

Exactly. The list consists of the successful startups that they founded, but not the ones that they tried and failed at before finding success. I'd like to think that most successful founders fail at their first few not so noteworthy "side-projects" before finding success and sticking to it. Just building a crappy version of something not-so-cool can teach you a lot about tech, business and design, which then helps you build better products in the future.

replicatorblog 8y ago

This is important. There's a big difference between getting started at 45 and founding your third company at 45. I don't think there is something biological, or even social that makes it hard to be a late-bloomer in tech entrepreneurship. It's just hard to develop an entirely new skillset and network in later-middle age. I think we'd mostly be skeptical of a doctor who started medical school at 45, and while the stakes for founders aren't as severe, the same principle applies.

tensor 8y ago
Well, we'd be even more skeptical of a doctor who dropped out of undergrad, never got a degree, and was promising world changing results, which is the prevailing narrative Silicon Valley seems to want to believe.
- taneq 8y ago
  There's an important difference between "dropped out of undergrad because you were failing" and "quit your course because your company succeeded so hard that finishing your course was irrelevant." You probably wouldn't be sceptical of a managing director of a medical research company who'd dropped out of med school when they reached 10+ employees.
  - tensor 8y ago
    I would be very skeptical actually. I might point to Theranos as an example of just what you describe too.
    - taneq 8y ago
      Given how many people believed in Theranos I think it's fair to say that their founder was pretty credible, despite the ultimate outcome.
jt2190 8y ago
> It's just hard to develop an entirely new skillset and network in later-middle age. To leave age out of it, the study shows that those who successfully founded growth companies already had the skillset and network to draw on. (Perhaps the older ages were due to the years it takes for someone build their skillset and network?)

adventured 8y ago

The idea is that the life experience you accumulate - and everything that goes with that - is often extremely valuable, critical to success. Zip2 got Musk started, it no doubt helped him accumulate experience and connections to start and run later ventures - training wheels for what came later. Musk could build Zip2 at 24. I would say there's zero chance he could have successfully built Tesla or SpaceX at 24 (ignoring the capital requirements). I think that far more often than not, to start and build great companies, requires a small lifetime of accumulated experience and mistakes. The media myth of the tech industry and its important companies being founded by 19 year old Zuckerbergs, is just that, a myth. The media loves that story because it sells, it's just not real.