4 ms·

This isn't just whining. My theory is that 500 2 person companies have a worse chance at making a real splash than if the 100 best ideas from that group had 10

by ericd 15y ago

This isn't just whining. My theory is that 500 2 person companies have a worse chance at making a real splash than if the 100 best ideas from that group had 10 good people working on them. That's part of what he's saying - it's harder now for good startups to grow when everyone wants to and is incentivized to make their own web startup. The other part he's saying is that people can have a larger marginal impact on the world working at a place like Facebook than they could in their own startup. For the median case, this is true.

a3camero 15y ago
Facebook was once one of those startups.
- AdamFernandez 15y ago
  That is exactly right. I would actually be very surprised if he believed what he was saying considering everything he has seen and been involved with. To say things will consolidate and stop as they are is extremely short sighted for one so experienced in these matters.
- ericd 15y ago
  The funding environment has changed quite a lot since then. YC didn't even exist when FB started. And FB would clearly be in that 100, given the massive growth it had. For every potential FB, there are lots of borderline useless apps that get funding, and wouldn't have when FB was first funded. Those people could have instead been working on FB. He's not complaining that startups are getting funding, he's saying that the overavailability of funding is acting as a repulsive force, keeping engineers from grouping up. Whether that's a bad thing on the balance, I'm not sure, but it's not an unmitigated good.
- nandemo 15y ago
  And so was Napster, his first company.
cpeterso 15y ago
> My theory is that 500 2 person companies have a worse chance at making a real splash than if the 100 best ideas from that group had 10 good people working on them. I wonder if there is an opportunity for matchmaker investors to scoop up like-minded startups and consolidate early companies to build those 100 10-person winners.
- ericd 15y ago
  That's an interesting idea. It might be fairly expensive to scoop them up, though, since they could reasonably expect to get a good amount of funding for their own idea.
- earbitscom 15y ago
  I often think that if I had $500M, I could buy 4 companies whose assets and teams combined with ours would create a company with massive potential, huge remarketing opportunities and defensibility that the companies alone do not have. There is definitely an opportunity to do this in theory. The issue is the problems that arise when you merge 5 companies with different cultures, strong-headed leaders and passions for solving problems that the new company may not find as much value in addressing.

by ericd 15y ago

a3camero 15y ago

Facebook was once one of those startups.

AdamFernandez 15y ago
That is exactly right. I would actually be very surprised if he believed what he was saying considering everything he has seen and been involved with. To say things will consolidate and stop as they are is extremely short sighted for one so experienced in these matters.
ericd 15y ago
The funding environment has changed quite a lot since then. YC didn't even exist when FB started. And FB would clearly be in that 100, given the massive growth it had. For every potential FB, there are lots of borderline useless apps that get funding, and wouldn't have when FB was first funded. Those people could have instead been working on FB. He's not complaining that startups are getting funding, he's saying that the overavailability of funding is acting as a repulsive force, keeping engineers from grouping up. Whether that's a bad thing on the balance, I'm not sure, but it's not an unmitigated good.
nandemo 15y ago
And so was Napster, his first company.

cpeterso 15y ago

> My theory is that 500 2 person companies have a worse chance at making a real splash than if the 100 best ideas from that group had 10 good people working on them. I wonder if there is an opportunity for matchmaker investors to scoop up like-minded startups and consolidate early companies to build those 100 10-person winners.

ericd 15y ago
That's an interesting idea. It might be fairly expensive to scoop them up, though, since they could reasonably expect to get a good amount of funding for their own idea.
earbitscom 15y ago
I often think that if I had $500M, I could buy 4 companies whose assets and teams combined with ours would create a company with massive potential, huge remarketing opportunities and defensibility that the companies alone do not have. There is definitely an opportunity to do this in theory. The issue is the problems that arise when you merge 5 companies with different cultures, strong-headed leaders and passions for solving problems that the new company may not find as much value in addressing.