8 ms·

All or something (2009)

202 points by llambda 15y ago

billpatrianakos 15y ago
I've been critical of seeing so many 37Signals posts around here lately but this one really is a true gem! He's right, there's this idea that you just have to work 24/7 and have no life to be a success. Businesses aren't cool but startups are. What's the difference? These days the difference is one is cool and the other isn't. One makes you think of the 20-something hipster genius loner hacker and the other makes you picture a boring mediocre person who didn't have the balls to do a startup so he starts a "business" (eww, gross, right?).
- phamilton 15y ago
  Business => J-O-B Job seems to be a four letter word in some circles...
  - billpatrianakos 15y ago
    I never thought of it that way. At first I didn't know what the hell you we're talking about because of the whole 25 hour a day work schedule people seem to think is necessary for startups but then I realized a lot of people, in some circles like you say, do a startup to avoid real work. I'm not saying a statup isnt real work, just that there is a group of people I've seen who go into some half baked startup idea because they seem to think if you call it a startup it's an excuse to play all day with personal projects that have no business model and hope to god the magic VC fairy will come to visit them one day.
    - phamilton 15y ago
      I blame books like "The 4 hour work week". It's all based on the misconception that if you work for yourself, you don't have a boss. In reality, you have a lot of bosses at that point it's just that they are called customers.
alberth 15y ago
CH blog post comment is so true (can't hard link to it): There is a fundamental difference in philosophy here. Some startups work 24/7 because they are “swinging for the fences” (to use a baseball analogy). Where other startups, like yourself [37signals] back in the day, are content with simply hitting “singles”. .... Here’s the philosophical difference, you can live a good life on hitting singles, but you’ll never become filthy rich unless you swing for the fences.
- jdminhbg 15y ago
  DHH seems to have gotten plenty "filthy rich" hitting singles: http://david.heinemeierhansson.com/racing http://david.heinemeierhansson.com/racing People who swing for the fences generally fly out to shallow center. You can score lots of runs hitting single after single after single.
  - alberth 15y ago
    Having a sports car fits into the "you can live a good life on hitting singles". Having your own private jet, is when you're filthy rich.
    - kerryfalk 15y ago
      This is well beyond your neighbour owning a Ferrari. It takes serious money to race in those leagues. And if I recall correctly I remember seeing a video of him racing one of my personal favourites, an Aston Martin V12 Vantage (Could have been a DB9/DBS, can't recall exactly). I would personally consider anyone who can drop six figures annually on a hobby filthy rich. The one's "living a good life" did the kind of racing I used to do, and the wealthy guys there only dropped 20-30k/ year racing around in parking lots.
    - rahoulb 15y ago
      Well the sports car in question is a one-off custom-build, purely for him, and rumoured to have cost a few millions of dollars. Not quite a private jet, but I would put that into "filthy rich" UPDATE: Link - http://www.luxist.com/2010/09/06/one-of-a-kind-pagani-zonda-hh-commissioned-by-chicago-software-m/ http://www.luxist.com/2010/09/06/one-of-a-kind-pagani-zonda-...
danko 15y ago
This, to me, is the best counterpoint I've read to Michael Arrington's rant from a few months back on how startup folk need to work harder and stop crying. http://uncrunched.com/2011/11/27/startups-are-hard-so-work-more-cry-less-and-quit-all-the-whining/ http://uncrunched.com/2011/11/27/startups-are-hard-so-work-m... Arrington is a romantic, and he believes passionately in the romantic mythos of the startup world. That's what drew him to the valley to start TechCrunch in the first place. And that view of the world is warped as hell. The key is you've just got to match the level of effort you're willing to give to the level of effort required to achieve the goal you've set out for yourself. Not all goals -- including entrepreneurial goals -- require a 120 hour a week personal commitment to succeed.
- darrellsilver 15y ago
  To me, the best counterpoint to Arrington's remarks is to understand where he's coming from. He's a blogger/journalist & VC. The biggest dreamers and swing-for-the-fencers make the best stories / investments. Of course, the journalist has it even better: He gets good copy when the home-run hitter swings and misses. :)
- gmartres 15y ago
  See also jwz reply: http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/11/watch-a-vc-use-my-name-to-sell-a-con/ http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/11/watch-a-vc-use-my-name-to-se...
meiji 15y ago
I think there's a general myth that you can't have your cake and eat it. Startup - work 24/7 or it'll tank. Work for a corporate - work 24/7 or you won't get noticed and be in the typing pool your entire life. Work in finance - work 24/7 or you'll miss the deal that makes you millions. The irony is, most people (but by no means all) actually realise that balance is important at a certain point and scale back willingly. The startup boom is no different from people starting small home businesses like they've done for years. We've slapped on a sexy name, told people you can become one of the world's richest people but fundamentally, it's the same as making pies in your kitchen. Some people will be happy making pies for the local market, others will want a deal to get them into a supermarket. There's space for everyone, you just need to find the level that makes you happy. In my opinion ;)
thesash 15y ago
Unfortunately, the entrepreneurial success story tends to get corrupted by the noisy example set by tech blogs, and pundits glorifying the investment cycle represented by companies like Groupon, Yelp, etc, rather than the quiet success stories of much more common but less high profile businesses that simply create things that people want and are willing to pay for. What results is confusion in the minds of young entrepreneurs between what it means to build a business and what it means to swing for the fences. Big ideas start can start small, and that does not preclude the possibility of swinging for the fences, but building the business should be the motivation and the priority, not visa versa. In fact, starting small, cultivating a product, and staying relentlessly focused on customer happiness is the right way to sart a business regardless of how big your ultimate ambitions are.
jcromartie 15y ago
I'll upvote this if only because I'm not that young, I have obligations, and I would prefer to have extracurricular activities. I am easily discouraged by the constant stream of wunderkind success stories, and the relative dearth of more "normal" people succeeding. By now I think I've realized that this is because of what sells in terms of news.
fuzzylizard 15y ago
I find that in tech culture--startups, coders, hackers alike--there is an attitude that if you don't live, breath, sleep your profession that you will fail. And I wonder if this idea that for a startup to succeed you have to give 24/7 comes from that attitude. One ruby conference, there were two talks by startup founders, the one presenter stated that the only way to succeed was to work 24/7 while the other presenter stated that success only came through working smart and taking time off to recharge and do other things. Both were successful. Personally, I have other things that I want to do and the sooner we can abolish this startup myth the better.
jskopek 15y ago
My experience has taught me that it can be all or nothing at during a startup's inception. At my last startup, we had to work incredibly hard to keep our first customers happy. I do, however, think 37s is right when they say that you can turn a startup into a sustainable, quieter business much earlier than most people would assume.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
yurylifshits 15y ago
You can work relaxed hours while testing hypotheses, building MVPs, interviewing prospective customers. Once you've got to product-market fit, it becomes drug-like addiction. It's too much fun to give it up for something else.
temphn 15y ago
The missing part here is that dhh is talented enough that he can date models and drive racecars while running both a multimillion dollar business and one of the world's most important open source projects. Many, perhaps most, aren't talented to that extent or can't context switch to that extent. They can get a lot done, but they have to have singleminded (dareisay "24/7") focus. Moreover, 37Signals is like the boutique software shop that developers respect, while Facebook is a goliath that doth bestride the world. Zuck is at G8 summits and truly playing for world domination. If that's your goal, as long as you know it's a once a decade phenomenon...go for it! The worst thing that can happen is that you fail and take the huge hit to your ego. I think there are a lot worse messages out there to our young than "work really hard on a business". The vacation culture of Europe and the leveraged culture of the US are about to lose out to the thrifty workaholics of China. dhh notwithstanding, there have to be some lessons in that.
- billybob 15y ago
  "The vacation culture of Europe and the leveraged culture of the US are about to lose out to the thrifty workaholics of China" Whether the Chinese have a better work ethic than Americans, I don't know. I'm also unclear what you mean by "lose out to." China has a billion more citizens than the U.S. They should be producing more than we are, but at around $5k per capita GDP, they are way behind our $48k per capita GDP. They may work hard, but they produce less, likely because they use manual labor for many of the things we automate. If they're outcompeting us in the price of exported goods, it's because they're willing to work dirt cheap (by our standards). As they get wealthier, they will have higher standards of living and their production costs will rise. Perhaps ours will have to go lower as well. But I hardly think we want the average American worker to strive for the life of the average Chinese worker today. You do have a point regarding borrowing vs saving. We westerners tend to live beyond our means, and that is biting us in the butt now. But again, are we "losing out" to the Chinese because we take more vacation? Exactly what do you think success looks like? A lot of people would say that working 24/7 to get a yacht but missing your children growing up IS losing out. The reward is not worth the sacrifice. And that's really what the post is about.
funkah 15y ago
Oh, I thought startups actually were like that, since I've never worked at one because being in perpetual crunch-mode sounds terrible. Plus I feel like any promise of some payoff in the future is really a setup to get fucked by someone who understands finance better than me. I'm not going to grind my life into dust so someone else can have 4 vacation homes instead of 3, then turn around and give me a $5k "attaboy". DHH calls the all-consuming startup lifestyle a "pervasive myth". I really don't know how much of a myth it is, but if a myth becomes pervasive enough, it's as good as reality in many scenarios. If enough people believe a dollar has zero value, then it does.
pg 15y ago
"One of the most pervasive myths of startup life is that it has to be all consuming." This supposed myth long precedes startups. If you look at the outliers in any field, you'll find many if not most are by ordinary people's standards excessively dedicated to their work. Isaac Newton and Michelangelo (to name just two of thousands of examples) were notorious for neglecting everything except their work. The fact that this pattern is so old and so widespread suggests that it is not a myth. A startup is simply a company designed to grow at an exceptionally high rate, and Occam's razor implies that to succeed at this takes the same level of dedication as exceptional performance in any other field.
- chc 15y ago
  I think you and David have different definitions of a "startup," or at least different ideas of how fast and how big they need to grow. I think he just means something like "a small, young company with some ambitions of growth." Your definition is certainly the usual one, especially in Silicon Valley, but I think David just wants to remind people that that isn't the only option if you have entrepreneurial ambitions, so he's using a less common but broader sense of the word. He even says as much at the end: "It’s almost like we need another word. Startup is a great one, but I feel like it’s been forever hijacked for this narrow style."
  - ejames 15y ago
    Part of it is a terminology problem. It's now common for any small business in the software industry to claim to be a "startup", even if it's actually a glorified consulting agency or contract software shop. Part of it is an integrity problem. In addition to describing your small business as a startup for marketing purposes, you might also call yourself a startup in order to make other claims - such as telling employees that their stock options are extraordinarily valuable, or making a rule that everyone must work 80 hours "just like the other startups". The flip side of the principle that exceptional businesses require exceptional effort is that almost all businesses are not exceptional.
- nreece 15y ago
  A startup is simply a company designed to grow at an exceptionally high rate Imo, most startups grow organically. Only a few grow at an exceptionally high rate.
keeptrying 15y ago
Doing a statup now. There is a LOT of work and a LOT of learning. I don't see how I can get to launch without working my tail off. I think this kind of crap us peddled by startups which happened to succeed because they hit profitability quickly and have cash cows that throw off a lot of cash. In a startup your going to be doing a lot of stuff you have no clue about - your going to gave to work your ass off in the beginning. But yes, starting a business is different from "startup". Lots of entrepreneurs dont get that.
- mattdeboard 15y ago
  What is the difference? A startup is a business by definition.
  - keeptrying 15y ago
    Every business is not a startup. A startup is a business which doesnt have guaranteed or well known cashflows. Or rather its trying to figure out its chashflows.
chaostheory 15y ago
"Most people will look at that and say that’s not me. I don’t have 110% to give. I have a family, I have a mortgage, I have other interests. Where’s my place in the startup world if all I have to give is 60%? What can putting in part-time give?" If you work full time for a software company, you will probably not be legally allowed to give 60% depending on your contract. I know a lot of my friends tend not to read them before signing. Of course this doesn't apply if you don't do a software start up while working for a software company.
peregrine 15y ago
I'm not sure there is one way to do it. The world needs companies pushing like the yc startup and it needs companies like 37signals. There is lots of room for both sides of the coin and the world is not so black and white as DHH or pg like to make it. :)
tstyle 15y ago
It is true that are probably many niche markets that pay respectable income to people who are willing to invest 10-20 hours per week. It's just like how many people become successful at their weekend hobbies and sports. But many things these days resemble a game of winner takes all(social products, App Store leaderboard, etc...) If you are striving for a top spot in one of these areas, chances are you are facing competitors who are working both "hard" AND "smart". The claim that you can work 10-20 hours a week and stay competitive in these situations just seems overly optimistic to me.
rythie 15y ago
Cause and effect switched? Lots of work probably won't make a failing startup succeed (you are probably going in the wrong direction or wasting time on the wrong things). However, a rapidly growing startup requires a lot of time, when it takes off, simply to scale business (hires, offices, VCs, server maintenance etc).
hasenj 15y ago
Please fix the title, this is not from 2009, it's from Feb 09, 2012.
asdfqwertyzxcv 15y ago
uh

202 points by llambda 15y ago

I've been critical of seeing so many 37Signals posts around here lately but this one really is a true gem! He's right, there's this idea that you just have to work 24/7 and have no life to be a success. Businesses aren't cool but startups are. What's the difference? These days the difference is one is cool and the other isn't. One makes you think of the 20-something hipster genius loner hacker and the other makes you picture a boring mediocre person who didn't have the balls to do a startup so he starts a "business" (eww, gross, right?).

phamilton 15y ago
Business => J-O-B Job seems to be a four letter word in some circles...
- billpatrianakos 15y ago
  I never thought of it that way. At first I didn't know what the hell you we're talking about because of the whole 25 hour a day work schedule people seem to think is necessary for startups but then I realized a lot of people, in some circles like you say, do a startup to avoid real work. I'm not saying a statup isnt real work, just that there is a group of people I've seen who go into some half baked startup idea because they seem to think if you call it a startup it's an excuse to play all day with personal projects that have no business model and hope to god the magic VC fairy will come to visit them one day.
  - phamilton 15y ago
    I blame books like "The 4 hour work week". It's all based on the misconception that if you work for yourself, you don't have a boss. In reality, you have a lot of bosses at that point it's just that they are called customers.

alberth 15y ago

CH blog post comment is so true (can't hard link to it): There is a fundamental difference in philosophy here. Some startups work 24/7 because they are “swinging for the fences” (to use a baseball analogy). Where other startups, like yourself [37signals] back in the day, are content with simply hitting “singles”. .... Here’s the philosophical difference, you can live a good life on hitting singles, but you’ll never become filthy rich unless you swing for the fences.

jdminhbg 15y ago
DHH seems to have gotten plenty "filthy rich" hitting singles: http://david.heinemeierhansson.com/racing http://david.heinemeierhansson.com/racing People who swing for the fences generally fly out to shallow center. You can score lots of runs hitting single after single after single.
- alberth 15y ago
  Having a sports car fits into the "you can live a good life on hitting singles". Having your own private jet, is when you're filthy rich.
  - kerryfalk 15y ago
    This is well beyond your neighbour owning a Ferrari. It takes serious money to race in those leagues. And if I recall correctly I remember seeing a video of him racing one of my personal favourites, an Aston Martin V12 Vantage (Could have been a DB9/DBS, can't recall exactly). I would personally consider anyone who can drop six figures annually on a hobby filthy rich. The one's "living a good life" did the kind of racing I used to do, and the wealthy guys there only dropped 20-30k/ year racing around in parking lots.
  - rahoulb 15y ago
    Well the sports car in question is a one-off custom-build, purely for him, and rumoured to have cost a few millions of dollars. Not quite a private jet, but I would put that into "filthy rich" UPDATE: Link - http://www.luxist.com/2010/09/06/one-of-a-kind-pagani-zonda-hh-commissioned-by-chicago-software-m/ http://www.luxist.com/2010/09/06/one-of-a-kind-pagani-zonda-...

danko 15y ago

This, to me, is the best counterpoint I've read to Michael Arrington's rant from a few months back on how startup folk need to work harder and stop crying. http://uncrunched.com/2011/11/27/startups-are-hard-so-work-more-cry-less-and-quit-all-the-whining/ http://uncrunched.com/2011/11/27/startups-are-hard-so-work-m... Arrington is a romantic, and he believes passionately in the romantic mythos of the startup world. That's what drew him to the valley to start TechCrunch in the first place. And that view of the world is warped as hell. The key is you've just got to match the level of effort you're willing to give to the level of effort required to achieve the goal you've set out for yourself. Not all goals -- including entrepreneurial goals -- require a 120 hour a week personal commitment to succeed.

darrellsilver 15y ago
To me, the best counterpoint to Arrington's remarks is to understand where he's coming from. He's a blogger/journalist & VC. The biggest dreamers and swing-for-the-fencers make the best stories / investments. Of course, the journalist has it even better: He gets good copy when the home-run hitter swings and misses. :)
gmartres 15y ago
See also jwz reply: http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/11/watch-a-vc-use-my-name-to-sell-a-con/ http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/11/watch-a-vc-use-my-name-to-se...

meiji 15y ago

I think there's a general myth that you can't have your cake and eat it. Startup - work 24/7 or it'll tank. Work for a corporate - work 24/7 or you won't get noticed and be in the typing pool your entire life. Work in finance - work 24/7 or you'll miss the deal that makes you millions. The irony is, most people (but by no means all) actually realise that balance is important at a certain point and scale back willingly. The startup boom is no different from people starting small home businesses like they've done for years. We've slapped on a sexy name, told people you can become one of the world's richest people but fundamentally, it's the same as making pies in your kitchen. Some people will be happy making pies for the local market, others will want a deal to get them into a supermarket. There's space for everyone, you just need to find the level that makes you happy. In my opinion ;)

thesash 15y ago

Unfortunately, the entrepreneurial success story tends to get corrupted by the noisy example set by tech blogs, and pundits glorifying the investment cycle represented by companies like Groupon, Yelp, etc, rather than the quiet success stories of much more common but less high profile businesses that simply create things that people want and are willing to pay for. What results is confusion in the minds of young entrepreneurs between what it means to build a business and what it means to swing for the fences. Big ideas start can start small, and that does not preclude the possibility of swinging for the fences, but building the business should be the motivation and the priority, not visa versa. In fact, starting small, cultivating a product, and staying relentlessly focused on customer happiness is the right way to sart a business regardless of how big your ultimate ambitions are.

jcromartie 15y ago

I'll upvote this if only because I'm not that young, I have obligations, and I would prefer to have extracurricular activities. I am easily discouraged by the constant stream of wunderkind success stories, and the relative dearth of more "normal" people succeeding. By now I think I've realized that this is because of what sells in terms of news.

fuzzylizard 15y ago

I find that in tech culture--startups, coders, hackers alike--there is an attitude that if you don't live, breath, sleep your profession that you will fail. And I wonder if this idea that for a startup to succeed you have to give 24/7 comes from that attitude. One ruby conference, there were two talks by startup founders, the one presenter stated that the only way to succeed was to work 24/7 while the other presenter stated that success only came through working smart and taking time off to recharge and do other things. Both were successful. Personally, I have other things that I want to do and the sooner we can abolish this startup myth the better.

jskopek 15y ago

My experience has taught me that it can be all or nothing at during a startup's inception. At my last startup, we had to work incredibly hard to keep our first customers happy. I do, however, think 37s is right when they say that you can turn a startup into a sustainable, quieter business much earlier than most people would assume.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

yurylifshits 15y ago

You can work relaxed hours while testing hypotheses, building MVPs, interviewing prospective customers. Once you've got to product-market fit, it becomes drug-like addiction. It's too much fun to give it up for something else.

temphn 15y ago

The missing part here is that dhh is talented enough that he can date models and drive racecars while running both a multimillion dollar business and one of the world's most important open source projects. Many, perhaps most, aren't talented to that extent or can't context switch to that extent. They can get a lot done, but they have to have singleminded (dareisay "24/7") focus. Moreover, 37Signals is like the boutique software shop that developers respect, while Facebook is a goliath that doth bestride the world. Zuck is at G8 summits and truly playing for world domination. If that's your goal, as long as you know it's a once a decade phenomenon...go for it! The worst thing that can happen is that you fail and take the huge hit to your ego. I think there are a lot worse messages out there to our young than "work really hard on a business". The vacation culture of Europe and the leveraged culture of the US are about to lose out to the thrifty workaholics of China. dhh notwithstanding, there have to be some lessons in that.

billybob 15y ago
"The vacation culture of Europe and the leveraged culture of the US are about to lose out to the thrifty workaholics of China" Whether the Chinese have a better work ethic than Americans, I don't know. I'm also unclear what you mean by "lose out to." China has a billion more citizens than the U.S. They should be producing more than we are, but at around $5k per capita GDP, they are way behind our $48k per capita GDP. They may work hard, but they produce less, likely because they use manual labor for many of the things we automate. If they're outcompeting us in the price of exported goods, it's because they're willing to work dirt cheap (by our standards). As they get wealthier, they will have higher standards of living and their production costs will rise. Perhaps ours will have to go lower as well. But I hardly think we want the average American worker to strive for the life of the average Chinese worker today. You do have a point regarding borrowing vs saving. We westerners tend to live beyond our means, and that is biting us in the butt now. But again, are we "losing out" to the Chinese because we take more vacation? Exactly what do you think success looks like? A lot of people would say that working 24/7 to get a yacht but missing your children growing up IS losing out. The reward is not worth the sacrifice. And that's really what the post is about.

funkah 15y ago

Oh, I thought startups actually were like that, since I've never worked at one because being in perpetual crunch-mode sounds terrible. Plus I feel like any promise of some payoff in the future is really a setup to get fucked by someone who understands finance better than me. I'm not going to grind my life into dust so someone else can have 4 vacation homes instead of 3, then turn around and give me a $5k "attaboy". DHH calls the all-consuming startup lifestyle a "pervasive myth". I really don't know how much of a myth it is, but if a myth becomes pervasive enough, it's as good as reality in many scenarios. If enough people believe a dollar has zero value, then it does.

pg 15y ago

"One of the most pervasive myths of startup life is that it has to be all consuming." This supposed myth long precedes startups. If you look at the outliers in any field, you'll find many if not most are by ordinary people's standards excessively dedicated to their work. Isaac Newton and Michelangelo (to name just two of thousands of examples) were notorious for neglecting everything except their work. The fact that this pattern is so old and so widespread suggests that it is not a myth. A startup is simply a company designed to grow at an exceptionally high rate, and Occam's razor implies that to succeed at this takes the same level of dedication as exceptional performance in any other field.

chc 15y ago
I think you and David have different definitions of a "startup," or at least different ideas of how fast and how big they need to grow. I think he just means something like "a small, young company with some ambitions of growth." Your definition is certainly the usual one, especially in Silicon Valley, but I think David just wants to remind people that that isn't the only option if you have entrepreneurial ambitions, so he's using a less common but broader sense of the word. He even says as much at the end: "It’s almost like we need another word. Startup is a great one, but I feel like it’s been forever hijacked for this narrow style."
- ejames 15y ago
  Part of it is a terminology problem. It's now common for any small business in the software industry to claim to be a "startup", even if it's actually a glorified consulting agency or contract software shop. Part of it is an integrity problem. In addition to describing your small business as a startup for marketing purposes, you might also call yourself a startup in order to make other claims - such as telling employees that their stock options are extraordinarily valuable, or making a rule that everyone must work 80 hours "just like the other startups". The flip side of the principle that exceptional businesses require exceptional effort is that almost all businesses are not exceptional.
nreece 15y ago
A startup is simply a company designed to grow at an exceptionally high rate Imo, most startups grow organically. Only a few grow at an exceptionally high rate.

keeptrying 15y ago

Doing a statup now. There is a LOT of work and a LOT of learning. I don't see how I can get to launch without working my tail off. I think this kind of crap us peddled by startups which happened to succeed because they hit profitability quickly and have cash cows that throw off a lot of cash. In a startup your going to be doing a lot of stuff you have no clue about - your going to gave to work your ass off in the beginning. But yes, starting a business is different from "startup". Lots of entrepreneurs dont get that.

mattdeboard 15y ago
What is the difference? A startup is a business by definition.
- keeptrying 15y ago
  Every business is not a startup. A startup is a business which doesnt have guaranteed or well known cashflows. Or rather its trying to figure out its chashflows.

chaostheory 15y ago

"Most people will look at that and say that’s not me. I don’t have 110% to give. I have a family, I have a mortgage, I have other interests. Where’s my place in the startup world if all I have to give is 60%? What can putting in part-time give?" If you work full time for a software company, you will probably not be legally allowed to give 60% depending on your contract. I know a lot of my friends tend not to read them before signing. Of course this doesn't apply if you don't do a software start up while working for a software company.

peregrine 15y ago

I'm not sure there is one way to do it. The world needs companies pushing like the yc startup and it needs companies like 37signals. There is lots of room for both sides of the coin and the world is not so black and white as DHH or pg like to make it. :)

tstyle 15y ago

It is true that are probably many niche markets that pay respectable income to people who are willing to invest 10-20 hours per week. It's just like how many people become successful at their weekend hobbies and sports. But many things these days resemble a game of winner takes all(social products, App Store leaderboard, etc...) If you are striving for a top spot in one of these areas, chances are you are facing competitors who are working both "hard" AND "smart". The claim that you can work 10-20 hours a week and stay competitive in these situations just seems overly optimistic to me.

rythie 15y ago

Cause and effect switched? Lots of work probably won't make a failing startup succeed (you are probably going in the wrong direction or wasting time on the wrong things). However, a rapidly growing startup requires a lot of time, when it takes off, simply to scale business (hires, offices, VCs, server maintenance etc).

hasenj 15y ago

Please fix the title, this is not from 2009, it's from Feb 09, 2012.

asdfqwertyzxcv 15y ago