3 ms·
You seem to share a common statistical misconception about success rates. If 10% of startups succeed, that doesn't mean that if you start a startup, your chanc
by pg 15y ago
You seem to share a common statistical misconception about success rates. If 10% of startups succeed, that doesn't mean that if you start a startup, your chances of succeeding are 10%. They are either much higher or much lower.
This is clearer if you consider a statement like "10% of men are over 6 feet tall." There's no one who has actually has a 10% chance of being over 6 feet tall. 10% of people have a 100% chance, and the remaining 90% have a 0% chance.
For the sort of person who has sufficient drive to get rich at all, starting a startup is a much more reliable way to do it than the overall success rate implies.
- jules 15y agoThe frequentist way you're doing probability in that comment is not valid since the success or failure of one particular startup is not a repeatable experiment. The only valid interpretations are (1) the frequentist probability across a group of startups and (2) the degree of belief, or bayesian probability of a single startup's success. In this framework it is entirely reasonable to assign a 10% probability of success to one particular startup. I agree that if you knew beforehand that you're in the small group of people whose success rate exceeds your standard for reliability, then for that person a startup would be a reliable way to get rich. The problem is, of course: how do you know which group you're in?
- pg 15y agoI didn't mean to imply that for the right sort of person the odds are 100%. But they're pretty good. Probably over 30% and maybe as high as 50%. And since failing is usually pretty quick you could easily try 3 startups in 5 years. As it turns out there is an easy way to know which group you're in: ask us. Like all venture investors, it's our job to answer that question, and we work very hard to try to do it well.