4 ms·

And luck too can be bought. With enough capital you can afford to play the game again and again.

Alex3917 7y ago
> And luck too can be bought. With enough capital you can afford to play the game again and again. If luck regresses to the mean both within and between startups, then it stands to reason that the value of more iterations is limited. I think it's probably more valuable just to be able to recognize which direction you're likely to regress toward.
- jjeaff 7y ago
  I'm not sure what you mean? If winning means getting 3 heads in a row by flipping 3 coins, and you have 3 coins to flip and someone else has 1,000 coins to flip, the second person is much more likely to win.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- teucris 7y ago
  Sure, but it seems to me that most can afford roughly one iteration at most. I would argue that being able to roll fair dice multiple times is still better than having weighted dice that you only get to roll once.
- Bootwizard 7y ago
  Tell that to firms like Softbank. They have enough money to play the game as long as they want. Even massive loses don't make them blink until WeWork happened.
  - Alex3917 7y ago
    That's largely irrelevant. The question is what is the optimal strategy for each player given the assets that they have. No one would deny that some people are starting off with vastly more assets than others.
- wpietri 7y ago
  Not really, because the returns and losses are asymmetric. If you lose, you lose maybe a million bucks of your own money, probably less. But if you win, you could be a billionaire. This means that people with rich families and rich connections can afford to play the game as much as they have a taste for.
ttul 7y ago
This is why startups are a game for rich kids. If you know you can’t really lose, then you can just try again and again until you hit the three cherries.
- mfrye0 7y ago
  Not necessarily. If you fail, just get a job, save up more money, then try again. The more you fail, the more you learn, the greater the likelihood of success the next time around.
- eloff 7y ago
  I think rich kids will often lack the inner motivation and discipline to see a startup through. That's the flip side of knowing you can fail and it won't impact your life negatively. Startups are really hard, if you don't have that burning desire and fear of failure driving you forward, I don't think too much of your chances. Anyone rich, or not can try again and again, it will just be harder for people who also need to figure out how to pay the bills.
  - robocat 7y ago
    Agree. And richkid can only found X startups in their lifetime. If they play the VC game, returns are still extremely variable. If they play a bigger game, then they start to be playing the same game as other players that the public can invest in (directly or indirectly) i.e. no advantage.
  - Bubbadoo 7y ago
    if you look at many startups that had successful outcomes, you'll generally find people who, if not rich, at least come from affluence. Affluence affords them the ability to take on more risk than say someone from a modest background, saddled with student loan debt. Generally, just because someone comes from wealth, it doesn't mean they won't work hard. I believe your comment is targeted more towards the trust-fund babies, who go through life having mommy and daddy pay for everything. Why work, when it'll all come to you?
- robocat 7y ago

> And luck too can be bought. With enough capital you can afford to play the game again and again. If luck regresses to the mean both within and between startups, then it stands to reason that the value of more iterations is limited. I think it's probably more valuable just to be able to recognize which direction you're likely to regress toward.

jjeaff 7y ago
I'm not sure what you mean? If winning means getting 3 heads in a row by flipping 3 coins, and you have 3 coins to flip and someone else has 1,000 coins to flip, the second person is much more likely to win.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
teucris 7y ago
Sure, but it seems to me that most can afford roughly one iteration at most. I would argue that being able to roll fair dice multiple times is still better than having weighted dice that you only get to roll once.
Bootwizard 7y ago
Tell that to firms like Softbank. They have enough money to play the game as long as they want. Even massive loses don't make them blink until WeWork happened.
- Alex3917 7y ago
  That's largely irrelevant. The question is what is the optimal strategy for each player given the assets that they have. No one would deny that some people are starting off with vastly more assets than others.
wpietri 7y ago
Not really, because the returns and losses are asymmetric. If you lose, you lose maybe a million bucks of your own money, probably less. But if you win, you could be a billionaire. This means that people with rich families and rich connections can afford to play the game as much as they have a taste for.

ttul 7y ago

This is why startups are a game for rich kids. If you know you can’t really lose, then you can just try again and again until you hit the three cherries.

mfrye0 7y ago
Not necessarily. If you fail, just get a job, save up more money, then try again. The more you fail, the more you learn, the greater the likelihood of success the next time around.
eloff 7y ago
I think rich kids will often lack the inner motivation and discipline to see a startup through. That's the flip side of knowing you can fail and it won't impact your life negatively. Startups are really hard, if you don't have that burning desire and fear of failure driving you forward, I don't think too much of your chances. Anyone rich, or not can try again and again, it will just be harder for people who also need to figure out how to pay the bills.
- robocat 7y ago
  Agree. And richkid can only found X startups in their lifetime. If they play the VC game, returns are still extremely variable. If they play a bigger game, then they start to be playing the same game as other players that the public can invest in (directly or indirectly) i.e. no advantage.
- Bubbadoo 7y ago
  if you look at many startups that had successful outcomes, you'll generally find people who, if not rich, at least come from affluence. Affluence affords them the ability to take on more risk than say someone from a modest background, saddled with student loan debt. Generally, just because someone comes from wealth, it doesn't mean they won't work hard. I believe your comment is targeted more towards the trust-fund babies, who go through life having mommy and daddy pay for everything. Why work, when it'll all come to you?
robocat 7y ago