4 ms·

I agree largely, I'm just not sure that insufficient effort/persistence so heavily outweighs low quality content as a reason for failure over time. I'd imagine

I agree largely, I'm just not sure that insufficient effort/persistence so heavily outweighs low quality content as a reason for failure over time. I'd imagine there are actually a large amount of "zombie" YouTubers that consistently put out videos that very few people (relatively) end up watching. A lot of startups end up in this "zombie" state rather than shutting down[0]. So I agree most probably just get discouraged and give up early. But I can easily see 9 long-time "zombie" YouTubers for every channel with a big audience. [0]https://yclist.com/ https://yclist.com/

tomhoward 6y ago
I guess it's that kind of topic where once you discuss it enough you reach consensus on a position that is neither particularly controversial nor insightful :) I gather the people who've found my earlier comments disagreeable are assuming I'm advocating that people blindly persist at something for countless years, even if they see no signs of success, which of course I'm not. My point assumes that by doing something with sufficient dedication for a sufficient amount of time, you'll learn the necessary skills, including learning how to learn, and learning how to gauge success, and learning when it's best to quit and try something else. I actually don't think it's likely there's huge numbers of "zombie" YouTubers, slogging away for years with no success. Sure, plenty of stuff gets posted that gets very few views, but not by people who are serious about making a career of it. Career-focused people either see signs of success or realise they need to find a new career path. As for the YC list, I know a lot about that list as my company is on it, as are several others run by people I know. There aren't many actual zombie companies on that list. There are companies that didn't become unicorns, but did become solid small-medium businesses that employ a decent number of people and provide important services to their customers, and will likely eventually be acquired for a decent return to the founders and investors. And there are others that have been abandoned, but provided valuable lessons to their founders, which helped equip them for greater success in the next stages of their career. My opinions expressed above are from having spent 10+ years running and observing others running startups, and by seeing what persistence and long-term success look like. I've never seen persistence work out badly for people, as long as they are adequately able to gauge their success along the way. I get saddened at the thought that people with the potential to do great things might be discouraged from giving something a go because somebody else tells them "you know, for every successful person you see, there are 10 people who failed", when the truth is not nearly that simple or dismal.

tomhoward 6y ago

I guess it's that kind of topic where once you discuss it enough you reach consensus on a position that is neither particularly controversial nor insightful :) I gather the people who've found my earlier comments disagreeable are assuming I'm advocating that people blindly persist at something for countless years, even if they see no signs of success, which of course I'm not. My point assumes that by doing something with sufficient dedication for a sufficient amount of time, you'll learn the necessary skills, including learning how to learn, and learning how to gauge success, and learning when it's best to quit and try something else. I actually don't think it's likely there's huge numbers of "zombie" YouTubers, slogging away for years with no success. Sure, plenty of stuff gets posted that gets very few views, but not by people who are serious about making a career of it. Career-focused people either see signs of success or realise they need to find a new career path. As for the YC list, I know a lot about that list as my company is on it, as are several others run by people I know. There aren't many actual zombie companies on that list. There are companies that didn't become unicorns, but did become solid small-medium businesses that employ a decent number of people and provide important services to their customers, and will likely eventually be acquired for a decent return to the founders and investors. And there are others that have been abandoned, but provided valuable lessons to their founders, which helped equip them for greater success in the next stages of their career. My opinions expressed above are from having spent 10+ years running and observing others running startups, and by seeing what persistence and long-term success look like. I've never seen persistence work out badly for people, as long as they are adequately able to gauge their success along the way. I get saddened at the thought that people with the potential to do great things might be discouraged from giving something a go because somebody else tells them "you know, for every successful person you see, there are 10 people who failed", when the truth is not nearly that simple or dismal.