4 ms·

Vivek has already done the research, and that's where he gets his 90% non-funded figure. If you want details click through the link provided in the TechCrunch a

Vivek has already done the research, and that's where he gets his 90% non-funded figure. If you want details click through the link provided in the TechCrunch article. The methodology is described on page 7 and seems sensible: http://www.kauffman.org/uploadedFiles/making-of-a-successful-entrepreneur.pdf http://www.kauffman.org/uploadedFiles/making-of-a-successful... This isn't an attack on you or YCombinator. It just doesn't make sense to critique Vivek's points by saying that "nearly all successful startups have investors." Because apparently they don't.

pg 16y ago
This paper doesn't support your claim. All it says about the criteria they used to select companies is the industry they were in. E.g. "Aerospace." Is he talking about SpaceX, or someone's 10-person shop making some component for light aircraft? The distinguishing feature of startups is their growth rate, not the industry they're in. Just look at the evidence in front of you. Think of famous startups you yourself know. Just name 10 well known startups, and see how many in your list haven't taken money from investors.
- tptacek 16y ago
  He's saying that "thinking of famous startups you yourself know" is a form of bias. He's just too nice to say it. Who cares, by the way, whether a startup is going to "scale" past a 10-person shop? A 10-person shop started by an immigrant creates 9 jobs. That's past the threshold in the existing bill you're championing.