6 ms·

What does it say about the question "Why do you want to work on this company for the next 10 years of your life?" when it turns out even the founders of the mos

What does it say about the question "Why do you want to work on this company for the next 10 years of your life?" when it turns out even the founders of the most successful startups in the world don't want to?

saikat 12y ago
Greg's not a founder of Stripe. And who asks that question?
- foobarqux 12y ago
  YC for one.
  - troels 12y ago
    Of founders or employees?
    - foobarqux 12y ago
      I think it's a pretty pedantic distinction in Greg's case and not germane to the point.
      - troels 12y ago
        I feel that either you misunderstood me or I misunderstand you. I'm leaning towards the first option. By which I mean - There's a distinction between the kind of interview that happens between a founder and an investor and the one that happens between an employee and an employer. I wouldn't be surprised if an investor asked that kind of question, but if an employer did, I would think it was rather arrogant.
        foobarqux 12y ago
        They ask it of founders. I thought you meant the point was irrelevant because Greg Brockman wasn't there at the very beginning.
        dang 12y ago
        > They ask it of founders. Correct, so it isn't relevant here. Please stop taking this thread off topic.
        foobarqux 12y ago
        If we imagine Greg was a founder what would be different exactly? (Also I'm curious, does anything I have said in this thread count as "gratuitously negative"?)
        dang 12y ago
        I'd be happy to discuss this with you at hn@ycombinator.com, but don't want to take the thread further off topic.
- adrianpike 12y ago
  Many interviewers have asked me that question. I generally reply openly about my ten-year plan, I promise that it's going to change, and I restate how large a challenge it is to maintain excitement and interest at their company for the next ten years of my life.
sergiotapia 12y ago
There are ambitious people and people who enjoy steady income. I feel like the ambitious people (the kind that start these sort of companies) do not feel comfortable working on the same thing for more than a couple of years. They get that itch, understandably.
codegeek 12y ago
As a founder, that question has merits. As a potential employee, if someone asks me that question, my answer frankly is "I don't know. It is hard to predict the future. I can tell you that whatever time I am with the company, you will see 100% commitment but 10 years is too far out". I have actually used this in a real interview. It is ridiculous to even ask this question to anyone who is worth the money.
Thaxll 12y ago
Because it's a stupid question, you never ask someone his plans for the next 10 years.
- foobarqux 12y ago
  YC and Sam Altman do.
  - AwesomeGriffin 12y ago
    Sounds more like a "let's see how their mind works" rather than a question of serious intent.
  - boomzilla 12y ago
    Doh, that's ironic. Did Sam apply to YC too? Did he answer: "I plan to flip this company in a year or so and become one of you"?
    - sama 12y ago
      I did apply to and do YC, and then I ran that company for 7 years. Had it been going better I would have been happy to run it for 3 more!
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
sama 12y ago
Greg isn't a founder of stripe. Larry and Sergey have been working on Google for 17 years. Mark has been working on Facebook for 11. Drew and Arash have now been working on Dropbox for 8 years. Brian, Nate, and Joe have been working on Airbnb for 7 years. Things change, of course, and you shouldn't work on a company that isn't working for 10 years. But I think it's a reasonable question to ask. If you go into something with a plan to do it for only a couple of years, you are unlikely to create anything important. I don't buy public or private equities I don't want to hold for 10 years (I have held some Apple shares 17 years now!), and I don't do jobs I can't see myself doing for 10 years (I ran my company, which was an ok but certainly not huge success, for 7+ years). I think more people would benefit from taking a long-term view on where they decide to spend their time and money--it's a really useful way to think about opportunity.
- rezistik 12y ago
  Personally I think founders should plan to do it for at least 5 or 10 years. If a founder doesn't think a company will be worth running in 5 or 10 years what does it say about their long term plans for it? Are there many examples of successful start-ups where the founders left within the first few years?
  - foobarqux 12y ago
    PayPal
    - rezistik 12y ago
      PayPal was founded in '98, they sold in '02. About 4 years. I guess that meets my criteria. I'd think PayPal was a special case though.
  - loopbit 12y ago
    Although I agree with you, I'd like to add a caveat: Pivots. The idea you end up implementing is rarely the idea you started with. Almost every startup pivots several times during its lifetime. Usually they are small pivots, small tweaks to the business plan, a market that you hadn't though of opening, a market not being as good as you thought... But big ones also happen. But even with very small pivots, the process might leave you somewhere you didn't expect. And sometimes this is good, too! You might end up with a much more solid business and doing work you love. Sometimes, this leaves you somewhere you no longer find exciting. That's exactly my case: I started a company 3 years ago with some friends, we pivoted a few times, found what we think is a nice product-market fit and the business is growing nicely. However, I find myself in a similar position to Greg: I'm not in a critical position (all the critical work is handled by my team, I only oversee it and guide it) and the role is not something that would interest me if it was offered to me. Basically, I'm here because I founded the company, I love the ideas it was founded on and I like my coworkers. I've talked long and hard about this with my co-founders, I've found a replacement and, if it works out, I'll leave the day to day running of company in the next few months.
bcg1 12y ago
If your question wasn't rhetorical, the answer would be "nothing". Quite obviously that question is more about how you answer than it is about what you answer.

saikat 12y ago

Greg's not a founder of Stripe. And who asks that question?

foobarqux 12y ago
YC for one.
- troels 12y ago
  Of founders or employees?
  - foobarqux 12y ago
    I think it's a pretty pedantic distinction in Greg's case and not germane to the point.
    - troels 12y ago
      I feel that either you misunderstood me or I misunderstand you. I'm leaning towards the first option. By which I mean - There's a distinction between the kind of interview that happens between a founder and an investor and the one that happens between an employee and an employer. I wouldn't be surprised if an investor asked that kind of question, but if an employer did, I would think it was rather arrogant.
      - foobarqux 12y ago
        They ask it of founders. I thought you meant the point was irrelevant because Greg Brockman wasn't there at the very beginning.
        dang 12y ago
        > They ask it of founders. Correct, so it isn't relevant here. Please stop taking this thread off topic.
        foobarqux 12y ago
        If we imagine Greg was a founder what would be different exactly? (Also I'm curious, does anything I have said in this thread count as "gratuitously negative"?)
        dang 12y ago
        I'd be happy to discuss this with you at hn@ycombinator.com, but don't want to take the thread further off topic.
adrianpike 12y ago
Many interviewers have asked me that question. I generally reply openly about my ten-year plan, I promise that it's going to change, and I restate how large a challenge it is to maintain excitement and interest at their company for the next ten years of my life.

sergiotapia 12y ago

There are ambitious people and people who enjoy steady income. I feel like the ambitious people (the kind that start these sort of companies) do not feel comfortable working on the same thing for more than a couple of years. They get that itch, understandably.

codegeek 12y ago

As a founder, that question has merits. As a potential employee, if someone asks me that question, my answer frankly is "I don't know. It is hard to predict the future. I can tell you that whatever time I am with the company, you will see 100% commitment but 10 years is too far out". I have actually used this in a real interview. It is ridiculous to even ask this question to anyone who is worth the money.

Thaxll 12y ago

Because it's a stupid question, you never ask someone his plans for the next 10 years.

foobarqux 12y ago
YC and Sam Altman do.
- AwesomeGriffin 12y ago
  Sounds more like a "let's see how their mind works" rather than a question of serious intent.
- boomzilla 12y ago
  Doh, that's ironic. Did Sam apply to YC too? Did he answer: "I plan to flip this company in a year or so and become one of you"?
  - sama 12y ago
    I did apply to and do YC, and then I ran that company for 7 years. Had it been going better I would have been happy to run it for 3 more!
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]

sama 12y ago

Greg isn't a founder of stripe. Larry and Sergey have been working on Google for 17 years. Mark has been working on Facebook for 11. Drew and Arash have now been working on Dropbox for 8 years. Brian, Nate, and Joe have been working on Airbnb for 7 years. Things change, of course, and you shouldn't work on a company that isn't working for 10 years. But I think it's a reasonable question to ask. If you go into something with a plan to do it for only a couple of years, you are unlikely to create anything important. I don't buy public or private equities I don't want to hold for 10 years (I have held some Apple shares 17 years now!), and I don't do jobs I can't see myself doing for 10 years (I ran my company, which was an ok but certainly not huge success, for 7+ years). I think more people would benefit from taking a long-term view on where they decide to spend their time and money--it's a really useful way to think about opportunity.

rezistik 12y ago
Personally I think founders should plan to do it for at least 5 or 10 years. If a founder doesn't think a company will be worth running in 5 or 10 years what does it say about their long term plans for it? Are there many examples of successful start-ups where the founders left within the first few years?
- foobarqux 12y ago
  PayPal
  - rezistik 12y ago
    PayPal was founded in '98, they sold in '02. About 4 years. I guess that meets my criteria. I'd think PayPal was a special case though.
- loopbit 12y ago
  Although I agree with you, I'd like to add a caveat: Pivots. The idea you end up implementing is rarely the idea you started with. Almost every startup pivots several times during its lifetime. Usually they are small pivots, small tweaks to the business plan, a market that you hadn't though of opening, a market not being as good as you thought... But big ones also happen. But even with very small pivots, the process might leave you somewhere you didn't expect. And sometimes this is good, too! You might end up with a much more solid business and doing work you love. Sometimes, this leaves you somewhere you no longer find exciting. That's exactly my case: I started a company 3 years ago with some friends, we pivoted a few times, found what we think is a nice product-market fit and the business is growing nicely. However, I find myself in a similar position to Greg: I'm not in a critical position (all the critical work is handled by my team, I only oversee it and guide it) and the role is not something that would interest me if it was offered to me. Basically, I'm here because I founded the company, I love the ideas it was founded on and I like my coworkers. I've talked long and hard about this with my co-founders, I've found a replacement and, if it works out, I'll leave the day to day running of company in the next few months.

bcg1 12y ago

If your question wasn't rhetorical, the answer would be "nothing". Quite obviously that question is more about how you answer than it is about what you answer.