4 ms·

I really don't understand the hate with which Dan Lyons is speaking. Startups are crazy, sometimes hugely profitable companies that sometimes start up with the

I really don't understand the hate with which Dan Lyons is speaking. Startups are crazy, sometimes hugely profitable companies that sometimes start up with the same money it takes to start a restaurant or less. Sometimes they succeed, sometimes they fail, sometimes they are a complete joke. It's intense and awesome and that's why we are all drawn to it: huge potential. VCs are a part of it and without them this market wouldn't exist. Not every startup needs VC money but some do and all the investment they have poured into the economy has had a positive impact. Again, I don't get the hate. Dan Lyons's article is completely absurd (maybe that was the point) but I see no reason to help him or anyone else by posting this ridiculous ant-startup link bait. They all the say the same thing in different ways and they all have this weird, bitter, almost-jealous resentment to them. I don't know if journalists are mad because they don't get into startups themselves, only cover them. Or because journalism has been fairly marginalized (sad but true) and is undergoing some major transitions... I don't know.

untog 14y ago
I don't know if journalists are mad because they don't get into startups themselves, only cover them. Or because journalism has been fairly marginalized (sad but true) and is undergoing some major transitions... I don't know. Not to defend the article (which I agree a little too snarky, but will get pageviews) but I imagine that working as a journalist covering startups is a thoroughly depressing existence. If it's anything like my (non-journalistic) interactions with the industry then every interesting, earnest startup founder you meet will be matched by five other over-confident blowhards selling bad ideas with bad polish on top. I know that I would never have the patience to actually interview people like that, so sometimes I give credit to tech journalists just for not spontaneous combusting at conferences.
- DannyBee 14y ago
  I can't upvote this comment enough. Your explanation reminds me of why people hate lawyers so much. For every 1 good lawyer I meet, I meet 5 truly horrible ones. The same is true of startup founders i've met. The responses you usually see to pointing out someone's idea is horrible is "well, it's hard to predict what ideas will be big, so you don't really know it's horrible. You may be wrong". Given most ideas are horrible, and most startups fail, the onus is on the guy telling you how "rottenfood.com: Rotten food shipped same-day to your door!" will be the next big thing to provide evidence his idea is not horrible. Usually this "evidence" is in the form of talking points: "Rotten Food is a 500 million dollar industry just ripe for disruption". Then when it fails "the idea was good, but the time wasn't right, but it was a valuable learning experience". No! The idea was not good. It was horrible. The fact that you think otherwise tells me it was not a valuable learning experience, because you didn't learn the most important thing. I can't even write up this comment without it turning into all snark, so i'm just going to leave it to the tech journalists :)
danielweber 14y ago
I can appreciate the fact that "mobile social" is sucking the oxygen out of the room for more standard start-ups, but I, too, found his hate too overwhelming. There are real people behind all those "crappy" companies.
- bdcravens 14y ago
  There's also real people behind shows like Jerry Springer and Honey Boo Boo. Doesn't man they're not crappy.
rhizome 14y ago
Consider the source, especially where Dan Lyons is concerned. His history demonstrates he is not a good judge of anything other than how to get on the wrong side of history. The John Doerr pic linked from the story is gold, though. Don't forget your pleated slacks, Pres. Coolidge!
genericresponse 14y ago
I think it's because the attitude in the startup community is ridiculously egotistical. It's a problem around development community as a whole but amplified with startups because there is a ton of get-rich-quick hero worship. The fact that someone can build a piece of code doesn't mean that it solves a problem. The fact that it solves a problem doesn't mean that they can get money for it. The fact that they can get money for it doesn't mean that the lifetime revenue it generates will exceed the cost to develop. So on and so on... Achieving these is as much about luck and timing as it is about skill. For most startups there are a few others also working on the problem including legacy providers and other startups. Succeeding and growing in the marketplace is about a ton of factors. Now we get back to the hero worship. The startup community, from what I can tell, pays lip service to luck and environment and honestly believes that the marketplace is meritocratic. This is compounded by getting hounded by recruiters because your skills are in demand, it definitely helps your ego. Ego breeds arrogance. Arrogance that is painfully annoying. Arrogance that makes this schaudenfreude so, so sweet.
- bitcartel 14y ago
  Have you seen Bravo's reality show 'Startups of Silicon Valley'? You'll want to cry.
  - genericresponse 14y ago
    Given that all their modern shows have about the same idea: Politicking, Gossip, Backstabbing and Drunken Whining Top Chef was sort of an exception on their network, which is sad. (Though it isn't exceptionally grounded in what an executive chef does. Where's the gripping examination of the price-list to determine what to buy from the greengrocer? Where's checking the walk in with the Sous to see what needs to go on special today?) I can picture the show and imagine how bad it is. Their show is "Startups" in the same way that The Real Housewives is about a housewife. It's meant to be a show for people who love nerds ala the big bang theory.
fatbird 14y ago
I understand it perfectly. The foundation of that hate is seeing an incredible amount of money, time, and energy devoted to a particularly brutal and inefficient way of finding the next startup that becomes Facebook, and getting in early. There's a saying: "Lotteries are a tax on stupid people". I would extend that to the 'circle jerk' in the Valley. You have people with money throwing it at people with ideas, hoping to win the lottery, basically. Along the way, you get a thousand crappy startups burning out ten thousand 19 year olds who dropped out of school because Zuckerberg did. It's wasteful. It generates companies like Flooze. It's a massive hype machine sucking up all the oxygen in the room, depriving other, more sensible, but less glamourous businesses of resources. The first comment on the article really captures it: "And you know what also sucks about this whole craziness that went on during these hard years?" "That minority of mid-career people like me, with both real-word business experience and multiple engineering degrees and realworld P&L and people management experience, who started companies this past 3 years with good solid ideas that can make money but couldn't raise much money due to a combination of age discrimination and the fact that the money was going to young, inexperienced entrepreneurs with stupid but frothy sexy ideas like Gourmair." Indeed. Lyons also identifies another real cost to the startup mania: "Meanwhile our country is facing a crisis because we have a shortage of students in STEM -- science, technology, engineering and math. Every big company in Silicon Valley is starved for talent. And there is an entire generation of young people who, instead of studying those hard subjects, would rather slap together the fourteenth version of a peeer-to-peer car sharing service or alternative taxi service. Because it's easy and you might get rich quick."
ryanisinallofus 14y ago
Pertinent: http://www.geekwire.com/2012/hey-seattle-amazon-deliver-meal/ http://www.geekwire.com/2012/hey-seattle-amazon-deliver-meal...

untog 14y ago

I don't know if journalists are mad because they don't get into startups themselves, only cover them. Or because journalism has been fairly marginalized (sad but true) and is undergoing some major transitions... I don't know. Not to defend the article (which I agree a little too snarky, but will get pageviews) but I imagine that working as a journalist covering startups is a thoroughly depressing existence. If it's anything like my (non-journalistic) interactions with the industry then every interesting, earnest startup founder you meet will be matched by five other over-confident blowhards selling bad ideas with bad polish on top. I know that I would never have the patience to actually interview people like that, so sometimes I give credit to tech journalists just for not spontaneous combusting at conferences.

DannyBee 14y ago
I can't upvote this comment enough. Your explanation reminds me of why people hate lawyers so much. For every 1 good lawyer I meet, I meet 5 truly horrible ones. The same is true of startup founders i've met. The responses you usually see to pointing out someone's idea is horrible is "well, it's hard to predict what ideas will be big, so you don't really know it's horrible. You may be wrong". Given most ideas are horrible, and most startups fail, the onus is on the guy telling you how "rottenfood.com: Rotten food shipped same-day to your door!" will be the next big thing to provide evidence his idea is not horrible. Usually this "evidence" is in the form of talking points: "Rotten Food is a 500 million dollar industry just ripe for disruption". Then when it fails "the idea was good, but the time wasn't right, but it was a valuable learning experience". No! The idea was not good. It was horrible. The fact that you think otherwise tells me it was not a valuable learning experience, because you didn't learn the most important thing. I can't even write up this comment without it turning into all snark, so i'm just going to leave it to the tech journalists :)

danielweber 14y ago

I can appreciate the fact that "mobile social" is sucking the oxygen out of the room for more standard start-ups, but I, too, found his hate too overwhelming. There are real people behind all those "crappy" companies.

bdcravens 14y ago
There's also real people behind shows like Jerry Springer and Honey Boo Boo. Doesn't man they're not crappy.

rhizome 14y ago

Consider the source, especially where Dan Lyons is concerned. His history demonstrates he is not a good judge of anything other than how to get on the wrong side of history. The John Doerr pic linked from the story is gold, though. Don't forget your pleated slacks, Pres. Coolidge!

genericresponse 14y ago

I think it's because the attitude in the startup community is ridiculously egotistical. It's a problem around development community as a whole but amplified with startups because there is a ton of get-rich-quick hero worship. The fact that someone can build a piece of code doesn't mean that it solves a problem. The fact that it solves a problem doesn't mean that they can get money for it. The fact that they can get money for it doesn't mean that the lifetime revenue it generates will exceed the cost to develop. So on and so on... Achieving these is as much about luck and timing as it is about skill. For most startups there are a few others also working on the problem including legacy providers and other startups. Succeeding and growing in the marketplace is about a ton of factors. Now we get back to the hero worship. The startup community, from what I can tell, pays lip service to luck and environment and honestly believes that the marketplace is meritocratic. This is compounded by getting hounded by recruiters because your skills are in demand, it definitely helps your ego. Ego breeds arrogance. Arrogance that is painfully annoying. Arrogance that makes this schaudenfreude so, so sweet.

bitcartel 14y ago
Have you seen Bravo's reality show 'Startups of Silicon Valley'? You'll want to cry.
- genericresponse 14y ago
  Given that all their modern shows have about the same idea: Politicking, Gossip, Backstabbing and Drunken Whining Top Chef was sort of an exception on their network, which is sad. (Though it isn't exceptionally grounded in what an executive chef does. Where's the gripping examination of the price-list to determine what to buy from the greengrocer? Where's checking the walk in with the Sous to see what needs to go on special today?) I can picture the show and imagine how bad it is. Their show is "Startups" in the same way that The Real Housewives is about a housewife. It's meant to be a show for people who love nerds ala the big bang theory.

fatbird 14y ago

I understand it perfectly. The foundation of that hate is seeing an incredible amount of money, time, and energy devoted to a particularly brutal and inefficient way of finding the next startup that becomes Facebook, and getting in early. There's a saying: "Lotteries are a tax on stupid people". I would extend that to the 'circle jerk' in the Valley. You have people with money throwing it at people with ideas, hoping to win the lottery, basically. Along the way, you get a thousand crappy startups burning out ten thousand 19 year olds who dropped out of school because Zuckerberg did. It's wasteful. It generates companies like Flooze. It's a massive hype machine sucking up all the oxygen in the room, depriving other, more sensible, but less glamourous businesses of resources. The first comment on the article really captures it: "And you know what also sucks about this whole craziness that went on during these hard years?" "That minority of mid-career people like me, with both real-word business experience and multiple engineering degrees and realworld P&L and people management experience, who started companies this past 3 years with good solid ideas that can make money but couldn't raise much money due to a combination of age discrimination and the fact that the money was going to young, inexperienced entrepreneurs with stupid but frothy sexy ideas like Gourmair." Indeed. Lyons also identifies another real cost to the startup mania: "Meanwhile our country is facing a crisis because we have a shortage of students in STEM -- science, technology, engineering and math. Every big company in Silicon Valley is starved for talent. And there is an entire generation of young people who, instead of studying those hard subjects, would rather slap together the fourteenth version of a peeer-to-peer car sharing service or alternative taxi service. Because it's easy and you might get rich quick."

ryanisinallofus 14y ago

Pertinent: http://www.geekwire.com/2012/hey-seattle-amazon-deliver-meal/ http://www.geekwire.com/2012/hey-seattle-amazon-deliver-meal...