11 ms·

> Maybe young founders are preferred because they are cheap and they fail fast. Also, they have a lot of energy and enthusiasm, so they work longer hours than

> Maybe young founders are preferred because they are cheap and they fail fast. Also, they have a lot of energy and enthusiasm, so they work longer hours than older founders. > They don't have the proverbial family to feed... ..or distract them (e.g. "I want to be home in time to put the kids to bed." vs "I pulled an all-nighter and finally cracked that problem." > ..and they don't have enough life experience to worry about going head first in a direction that may contain a blind corner. That lack of experience also means that they are less likely to reject an idea as too crazy/off-the-wall (which is what many people think the best ideas are, at first glance). Older founders are more likely to perceive the risks and downsides, and be more tentative and less aggressive as a result.

Swizec 12y ago
As I like to say: I had my startup stint when I was 20/21. Now that I'm older (27), it's time to start a real business. The kind that takes 5 years to build, delivers solid value to customers, makes two or three people independently wealthy, and feeds twenty families. But no VC is ever going to fund that.
- MCRed 12y ago
  .... and the chances of success are a hundred fold better.
- michaelochurch 12y ago
  Now that I'm older (27), it's time to start a real business. The kind that takes 5 years to build, delivers solid value to customers, makes two or three people independently wealthy, and feeds twenty families. But no VC is ever going to fund that. I've come to believe that self-improving processes (such as economics and technology) exhibit a "natural growth rate", that this could even be applied to a person, and that for programmers it's about 20-40 percent per year. Compared to anything else, that's very high. We can reliably grow a skill base or a company at around that rate, give or take. Of course, starting a new business is risky, but there's not strong evidence that it ought to be riskier than starting a new job. Sure, half of small businesses fail within 5 years. But half of all jobs turn to crap in 5 years. At any rate, the mid-risk / mid-growth space that tends toward 20-40% growth and a non-zero but not obscene rate of failure is... as you've noted, severely overlooked. Bank loans require personal liability and are therefore only viable if there's nearly a zero chance of failure. VC builds disposable companies that have a 1/10 chance of returning 20x and a 1/100 chance of returning 250x. In the mid-risk / mid-growth space? Nothing. I think part of the problem is that such businesses-- even though they add more value in toto than anything else (they're where most open-source software comes from)-- are very difficult to sell. The issue is that VCs are optimizing for their careers rather than their portfolios. You can just as credibly build a portfolio out of mid-risk/mid-growth businesses as these get-rich-quick-or-die gambits. The problem is that you don't become a celebrity investor by building a great portfolio, but by having "been in on" the Facebook or Google that comes every few years.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
rayiner 12y ago
I'd pull the all-nighters before the big demo in my startup days, but at 30 I find I'm too busy to pull all-nighters. As for families, my gut feeling is that what I've added in time obligations to the wife and kid, I've recouped in time I don't spend socializing or trying to get laid.
- geezergeeksrock 12y ago
  I suspect many of us older coders don't pull all-nighters because 1. We've not left critical codding to the last minute. 2. If critical coding is not completed, you realize doing it at the last minute usually means crap-code. 3. Code produced at 3:00AM after 8 cups of coffee is usually crap code. 4. Good Project Management skills either learned formally or over 20-30 years means the team has created a good WBS so you are not coding at 3:00AM. 5. All nighters usually mean something is being done wrong. Geezer-Geeks know that. Coding is a marathon, not a series of crazed sprints. Nuff said for now.
empressplay 12y ago
It's amusing that this gets down-voted when a similar comment yesterday suggesting that men were better suited for SV life than women was up-voted...
MCRed 12y ago
This is a list of prejudices that don't hold up in my experience. First off, while younger people have more energy, they are also much less efficient. Experience means you can produce more for a given amount of energy. I'm single, due to a recent divorce, and have no kids. So, what family do you think is distracting me? Do you think Steve Jobs was a poor CEO because he had a family to distract him? Hell, he had a major illness and still executed. I really don't get where people think that experience means you'll reject ideas as "too crazy". I thin there are people with imagination and vision. Most people don't have it, and most people reject ideas out of hand whatever their age. People with imagination and vision embrace ideas, no matter their age. Percieving risks and downsides is a good idea-- because it means you can avoid them while still executing your idea. The assumption they are more tentative is a nonsequitor-- and illogical. How is having a better perception of what at is safe and what path is less safe going to make you MORE tentative than someone who can't see as well? Aggresiveness is boosted by confidence, and experience produces confidence.
- jackgavigan 12y ago
  > This is a list of prejudices that don't hold up in my experience. It doesn't matter whether they're true or not. What matters is whether the VCs who lack the common sense James refers to in his blog post, believe that they're true. Or perhaps you have an alternative explanation for ageism?
WalterBright 12y ago
Older and younger engineers have complementary strengths. A good organization has a mix of both.

Swizec 12y ago

As I like to say: I had my startup stint when I was 20/21. Now that I'm older (27), it's time to start a real business. The kind that takes 5 years to build, delivers solid value to customers, makes two or three people independently wealthy, and feeds twenty families. But no VC is ever going to fund that.

MCRed 12y ago
.... and the chances of success are a hundred fold better.
michaelochurch 12y ago
Now that I'm older (27), it's time to start a real business. The kind that takes 5 years to build, delivers solid value to customers, makes two or three people independently wealthy, and feeds twenty families. But no VC is ever going to fund that. I've come to believe that self-improving processes (such as economics and technology) exhibit a "natural growth rate", that this could even be applied to a person, and that for programmers it's about 20-40 percent per year. Compared to anything else, that's very high. We can reliably grow a skill base or a company at around that rate, give or take. Of course, starting a new business is risky, but there's not strong evidence that it ought to be riskier than starting a new job. Sure, half of small businesses fail within 5 years. But half of all jobs turn to crap in 5 years. At any rate, the mid-risk / mid-growth space that tends toward 20-40% growth and a non-zero but not obscene rate of failure is... as you've noted, severely overlooked. Bank loans require personal liability and are therefore only viable if there's nearly a zero chance of failure. VC builds disposable companies that have a 1/10 chance of returning 20x and a 1/100 chance of returning 250x. In the mid-risk / mid-growth space? Nothing. I think part of the problem is that such businesses-- even though they add more value in toto than anything else (they're where most open-source software comes from)-- are very difficult to sell. The issue is that VCs are optimizing for their careers rather than their portfolios. You can just as credibly build a portfolio out of mid-risk/mid-growth businesses as these get-rich-quick-or-die gambits. The problem is that you don't become a celebrity investor by building a great portfolio, but by having "been in on" the Facebook or Google that comes every few years.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

rayiner 12y ago

I'd pull the all-nighters before the big demo in my startup days, but at 30 I find I'm too busy to pull all-nighters. As for families, my gut feeling is that what I've added in time obligations to the wife and kid, I've recouped in time I don't spend socializing or trying to get laid.

geezergeeksrock 12y ago
I suspect many of us older coders don't pull all-nighters because 1. We've not left critical codding to the last minute. 2. If critical coding is not completed, you realize doing it at the last minute usually means crap-code. 3. Code produced at 3:00AM after 8 cups of coffee is usually crap code. 4. Good Project Management skills either learned formally or over 20-30 years means the team has created a good WBS so you are not coding at 3:00AM. 5. All nighters usually mean something is being done wrong. Geezer-Geeks know that. Coding is a marathon, not a series of crazed sprints. Nuff said for now.

empressplay 12y ago

It's amusing that this gets down-voted when a similar comment yesterday suggesting that men were better suited for SV life than women was up-voted...

MCRed 12y ago

This is a list of prejudices that don't hold up in my experience. First off, while younger people have more energy, they are also much less efficient. Experience means you can produce more for a given amount of energy. I'm single, due to a recent divorce, and have no kids. So, what family do you think is distracting me? Do you think Steve Jobs was a poor CEO because he had a family to distract him? Hell, he had a major illness and still executed. I really don't get where people think that experience means you'll reject ideas as "too crazy". I thin there are people with imagination and vision. Most people don't have it, and most people reject ideas out of hand whatever their age. People with imagination and vision embrace ideas, no matter their age. Percieving risks and downsides is a good idea-- because it means you can avoid them while still executing your idea. The assumption they are more tentative is a nonsequitor-- and illogical. How is having a better perception of what at is safe and what path is less safe going to make you MORE tentative than someone who can't see as well? Aggresiveness is boosted by confidence, and experience produces confidence.

jackgavigan 12y ago
> This is a list of prejudices that don't hold up in my experience. It doesn't matter whether they're true or not. What matters is whether the VCs who lack the common sense James refers to in his blog post, believe that they're true. Or perhaps you have an alternative explanation for ageism?

WalterBright 12y ago

Older and younger engineers have complementary strengths. A good organization has a mix of both.