5 ms·
In 2009 I started a company with another guy, and I used to read articles like this, about how startups are so very difficult, and how you have to put everythin
by ryanwaggoner 15y ago
In 2009 I started a company with another guy, and I used to read articles like this, about how startups are so very difficult, and how you have to put everything on the line, your health, your wealth, your relationships, everything. It's a very common theme in startup-land, and I constantly hear from founders who sacrificed their marriages, worked 19 hour days, slept under their desks, and racked up tens of thousands in credit card debt, all to make their dream a reality. The message is very clear: you have to be willing to do anything to succeed. Articles like this fed my ego, and made me feel like I was part of an elite cadre of founders. Then my startup failed, leaving myself and my cofounder with tens of thousands in debt and a pretty rough mess to clean up.
In the meantime, a good friend of mine who started a little project on the side slowly grew it over a period of a couple years into something that supports his family very well and has a good shot at doing millions in revenue within the next 5-10 years. And I don't think he's been very stressed while doing it. He loves what he does, has tons of time for his family, etc. The cynical among us might term this a "lifestyle business" and they'd be right. But I don't think that bothers him and I can't say I blame him.
There's this really ugly side of the startup world that drives founders to completely unreasonable levels in pursuit of fast wealth creation, and it comes as a result of two factors: founders are naturally ambitious, driven people, and investors are in a hit-driven business. So the result is that investors naturally gravitate towards founders who either hit a billion dollars in a few years, or die trying (sometimes literally), and then investors and founders both are incentivized to craft this story that they only way to win is to win big, fast, and with all your chips on the line. And these things become self-reinforcing, so you have investors talking about how the real reason startups are so valuable is that founders can work so hard that they accomplish a career's worth of work in just a few years. The message is clear: you need to work 90 hours a week and either be the next Dropbox or flame out. And for the model most investors work under, that's the only way they really make money.
But the more I look around, the more I wonder if there's really much correlation between blowing your life up and startup success. Yes, you hear a lot of successful founders talking about how they killed themselves to get there. But thanks to survivorship bias, you don't hear from all the ones who risked everything, turned their lives and relationships and health upside down, and then lost. And increasingly, I'm seeing a lot of examples of very successful founders who definitely work hard, but keep an eye on themselves, their health, their relationships, etc. and have lines they're just not willing to cross. 37signals is the classic example here, but there are scores of others, many of them right here on HN. The key seems to be patience and humility, two things a lot of 20-something founders (including myself) have in very short supply
Maybe startups are so hard because we're doing them wrong.
- ljlolel 15y agoI have a similar story from back in 2008 (Labmeeting.com). Fortunately, I've had good success since then, but I learned the same lessons as you: Don't go all out working 90 hour weeks only to burn out, don't get into debt for your company, don't become distracted by the startup scene and Techcrunch and trying to get the millions in vc funding.
- ryanwaggoner 15y agoCan't agree more. I hear people in the startup world talk about how it's a marathon, not a sprint. And then I find out that they mean you might have to work at this for three or four years! The founders I admire most have almost all spent decades building their companies. I don't know if anyone in our industry is capable of thinking beyond the next 18 months, let alone 18 years.
- ljlolel 15y agoThe guys I know personally who are successful, who have become "overnight" successes recently (like box.net, airbnb, dropbox, and so on) have been at it (on the same company, not to mention the priors) for 4+ years beforehand or longer. Wow, 18 years, I guess I still haven't learned my lessons!
- ryanwaggoner 15y agoJust to be clear, I'm not disparaging anyone who has experienced success quickly, but companies like Dropbox are an aberration, even if they weren't an "overnight success". The more realistic company probably takes a few years to hit 10 employees, and a decade or more to hit 100.
- DanielRibeiro 15y agoI completely agree with you. In particular about the sacrifice everything misconception. Ash Maurya goes even further into suggesting Keep your day job[1], until you reach product/market fit. Nevertheless, I am always wary of absolutes. Some people can't wait, and not going all in is very harmful for them. Some people have a lot to lose, and cannot afford such approach. As always, context is king. [1] http://www.ashmaurya.com/2010/03/bootstrapping-a-lean-startup/ http://www.ashmaurya.com/2010/03/bootstrapping-a-lean-startu...