3 ms·

But surely an analysis of the reasons why they stopped working on it would prove interesting? I.e., what chain or confluence of events brought them to the brea

by walterk 18y ago

But surely an analysis of the reasons why they stopped working on it would prove interesting? I.e., what chain or confluence of events brought them to the breaking point, and what processes/practices could have prevented them from reaching it? I imagine there's probably a great deal to learn from even the most "boring" failures.

staunch 18y ago
I don't think so, not so much. I suspect we're all experts to some degree at the myriad of reasons one has for giving up on a project. There's no reason to suspect the YC founders have any special reasons for giving up. You'd probably benefit a lot more analyzing the reasons why you personally give up on projects than why someone else has.
- walterk 18y ago
  I'm not interested in the abstract reasons why people give up ("ran out of funding", "founders broke up", "burnout", etc.). We know all those, definitely. What I'm interested in are the specifics. What specific decisions (and in what contexts) led to a lack of funds, what specific disputes or personal issues led to founders breaking up, what shifts in the market made their startup not viable, and so on. That's the real world data that we don't necessarily have from experience.
  - yeti 18y ago
    I think people give up mainly due to lack of momentum leading to lack of motivation. I can tell you how we failed with our first product. Bad design choices (that people would accept a large client download, that Mac wasn't that important) and a bad UI meant a bad user experience. Plus a lack of up front planning about why would users want to use us. Therefore the users never returned - the lack of momentum had a big negative effect on morale. Every day in the office was miserable then because we knew people weren't using/enjoying our product and we weren't growing. We made a tough choice to abandon that first product and our new site is starting to rock and is heading in right direction. The positive momentum has such a big impact on morale and every day hearing a user say "I'm so glad I found this site" is best motivation to keep going through all startup challenges. So it comes back to momentum from users, and that comes back to good design and understanding what people want and why they would use your product. just my $0.02
    - timr 18y ago
      But that's a great example of a lesson to be learned from stories about quitting: sometimes you do it because a hard reset is the best option. Knowing where that point lies is valuable knowledge. Personally, I want to hear stories about failure more than stories about success. Stories about success are boring and repetitive, because they usually revolve around some combination of luck and persistence. But the truly hard decisions in life come when you're spinning your wheels, and you need to determine when it's time to cut your losses.
      - yeti 18y ago
        once we finally made the tough decision to abandon the first product, then designing and making the second product was so much (3-4x) faster, as we knew exactly what sucked the first time around and how to avoid all the inefficiencies as well. so i guess, actually failure was very valuable. i actually see 3-4 much larger / better funded startups in our field who now are repeating the mistakes we made in our first product, but somehow I guess they won't be able to make that decision to change course.. easy when you're smaller and flexible.
pg 18y ago
The biggest reason founders stop working on their startups is that they get demoralized. Some people seem to have unlimited self-generated morale. These almost always succeed. At the other extreme there are people who seem to have no ability to do this; they need a boss to motivate them. In the middle there is a large band of people who have some, but not unlimited, ability to motivate themselves. These can succeed through careful morale management (and some luck). I'd say about a quarter to a third of founders we fund have never-give-up morale. The rest are mostly in the middle group. For the people in the middle group, I think the big danger is not knowing what to do next. That's why it's so important to launch early. Once you get something in front of users, they tell you what to do next. Not that you should do exactly what they tell you; you have to guess what they really need. But at least you start to have some data about that.
- patio11 18y ago
  unlimited self-generated morale I have seen people learn this talent from two sources: 1) A deep, abiding conviction that they will get what they want because they always get what they want. 2) A cheerful disregard for other's predictions of failure (or well-founded empirical observation that the project is anything but a success) -- because "you've only failed once you quit". Type #2 are much easier to have dinner with but I've certainly seen #1 work.
  - stevewa 18y ago
    #1 makes me think of a Steve Jobs or Bill Gates type. #2 is more optimistic. But what if you started optimistic, but after years of dealing with stupid people who can't even write decent emails, your morale has fallen so low you can't stay excited? Is there any way to recover, short of wiping your memory of the past and starting out innocent and optimistic again? Or is that part of what makes it an exclusive trait of the successful, because it is very hard to stay optimistic over the long haul, therefore only a handful actually succeed... Maybe the pharma industry can make "stay optimistic" drugs just for startups...
- opticksversi 18y ago
  Some people seem to have unlimited self-generated morale. These almost always succeed. This sounds like 16PF Second-Order Factor IV: Subduedness vs. Independence -- also known as "field independence". . From Page 119-20 of the "Handbook for the 16PF": Both the ratings and the primaries in Q-data support this pattern, describing a person who is independent, radical, autistic, projective, and a law to himself (hence the alternative designation of this dimension as "Promethian Will").

by walterk 18y ago

staunch 18y ago

I don't think so, not so much. I suspect we're all experts to some degree at the myriad of reasons one has for giving up on a project. There's no reason to suspect the YC founders have any special reasons for giving up. You'd probably benefit a lot more analyzing the reasons why you personally give up on projects than why someone else has.

walterk 18y ago
I'm not interested in the abstract reasons why people give up ("ran out of funding", "founders broke up", "burnout", etc.). We know all those, definitely. What I'm interested in are the specifics. What specific decisions (and in what contexts) led to a lack of funds, what specific disputes or personal issues led to founders breaking up, what shifts in the market made their startup not viable, and so on. That's the real world data that we don't necessarily have from experience.
- yeti 18y ago
  I think people give up mainly due to lack of momentum leading to lack of motivation. I can tell you how we failed with our first product. Bad design choices (that people would accept a large client download, that Mac wasn't that important) and a bad UI meant a bad user experience. Plus a lack of up front planning about why would users want to use us. Therefore the users never returned - the lack of momentum had a big negative effect on morale. Every day in the office was miserable then because we knew people weren't using/enjoying our product and we weren't growing. We made a tough choice to abandon that first product and our new site is starting to rock and is heading in right direction. The positive momentum has such a big impact on morale and every day hearing a user say "I'm so glad I found this site" is best motivation to keep going through all startup challenges. So it comes back to momentum from users, and that comes back to good design and understanding what people want and why they would use your product. just my $0.02
  - timr 18y ago
    But that's a great example of a lesson to be learned from stories about quitting: sometimes you do it because a hard reset is the best option. Knowing where that point lies is valuable knowledge. Personally, I want to hear stories about failure more than stories about success. Stories about success are boring and repetitive, because they usually revolve around some combination of luck and persistence. But the truly hard decisions in life come when you're spinning your wheels, and you need to determine when it's time to cut your losses.
    - yeti 18y ago
      once we finally made the tough decision to abandon the first product, then designing and making the second product was so much (3-4x) faster, as we knew exactly what sucked the first time around and how to avoid all the inefficiencies as well. so i guess, actually failure was very valuable. i actually see 3-4 much larger / better funded startups in our field who now are repeating the mistakes we made in our first product, but somehow I guess they won't be able to make that decision to change course.. easy when you're smaller and flexible.

pg 18y ago

The biggest reason founders stop working on their startups is that they get demoralized. Some people seem to have unlimited self-generated morale. These almost always succeed. At the other extreme there are people who seem to have no ability to do this; they need a boss to motivate them. In the middle there is a large band of people who have some, but not unlimited, ability to motivate themselves. These can succeed through careful morale management (and some luck). I'd say about a quarter to a third of founders we fund have never-give-up morale. The rest are mostly in the middle group. For the people in the middle group, I think the big danger is not knowing what to do next. That's why it's so important to launch early. Once you get something in front of users, they tell you what to do next. Not that you should do exactly what they tell you; you have to guess what they really need. But at least you start to have some data about that.

patio11 18y ago
unlimited self-generated morale I have seen people learn this talent from two sources: 1) A deep, abiding conviction that they will get what they want because they always get what they want. 2) A cheerful disregard for other's predictions of failure (or well-founded empirical observation that the project is anything but a success) -- because "you've only failed once you quit". Type #2 are much easier to have dinner with but I've certainly seen #1 work.
- stevewa 18y ago
  #1 makes me think of a Steve Jobs or Bill Gates type. #2 is more optimistic. But what if you started optimistic, but after years of dealing with stupid people who can't even write decent emails, your morale has fallen so low you can't stay excited? Is there any way to recover, short of wiping your memory of the past and starting out innocent and optimistic again? Or is that part of what makes it an exclusive trait of the successful, because it is very hard to stay optimistic over the long haul, therefore only a handful actually succeed... Maybe the pharma industry can make "stay optimistic" drugs just for startups...
opticksversi 18y ago
Some people seem to have unlimited self-generated morale. These almost always succeed. This sounds like 16PF Second-Order Factor IV: Subduedness vs. Independence -- also known as "field independence". . From Page 119-20 of the "Handbook for the 16PF": Both the ratings and the primaries in Q-data support this pattern, describing a person who is independent, radical, autistic, projective, and a law to himself (hence the alternative designation of this dimension as "Promethian Will").