3 ms·

I have an (utterly unsubstantiated) theory about this. I think that startups started by people with a business background have a BETTER chance of SOME SORT of

I have an (utterly unsubstantiated) theory about this. I think that startups started by people with a business background have a BETTER chance of SOME SORT of success than startups started by hackers. That being said, I think that businesses started by hackers have a greater chance for spectacular success (which is the empirical evidence that I think you're talking about-- and that kind of success is the only kind most VCs (or press outlets or bloggers) really care about or want to talk about. In other words, business people are more equipped to solve the problems that assail most businesses-- and slog through to some sort of success/profit. Hackers, on the other hand, are more apt to ignore these problems or attempt do something revolutionary. When biz people try to emulate hackers and aim for these revolutionary victories, that's where you often see the flameouts that you're talking about.

sbraford 19y ago
As PG has stated in his essays, it's much easier for a smart hacker to learn customer support, accounting systems, marketing/blogging, than it is for a non-technical person to pick up hacking in a few days. Non-technical founders tend to overvalue: - their lovely snowflake of an idea - their business plan (that it will magically cause investors to beat a path to their door) Things imho that can be hard for a hacker: - sales - finding and/or dealing with investors (getting into Y Combinator definitely seems to help here, but what if you don't make the cut?) If I could find a non-tech guy who can successfully raise angel and/or venture capital money, I would totally partner with as a co-founder in a second. (given a good fit, etc) These people tend to be hard to find though (the Steve Jobs' of the world) -- if they can raise money, why don't they just raise a round and hire a talented hacker at 1% equity instead of 30%? =)

sbraford 19y ago

As PG has stated in his essays, it's much easier for a smart hacker to learn customer support, accounting systems, marketing/blogging, than it is for a non-technical person to pick up hacking in a few days. Non-technical founders tend to overvalue: - their lovely snowflake of an idea - their business plan (that it will magically cause investors to beat a path to their door) Things imho that can be hard for a hacker: - sales - finding and/or dealing with investors (getting into Y Combinator definitely seems to help here, but what if you don't make the cut?) If I could find a non-tech guy who can successfully raise angel and/or venture capital money, I would totally partner with as a co-founder in a second. (given a good fit, etc) These people tend to be hard to find though (the Steve Jobs' of the world) -- if they can raise money, why don't they just raise a round and hire a talented hacker at 1% equity instead of 30%? =)