Comment by Sukotto | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Sukotto | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I have GOT to stop reading these sorts of articles.

They make it big because they are networked with the sorts of people who have money to spend (either by being a former employee of an acquisition-happy company, or being pre-vetted by a group like YCombinator). Based on other articles of this type, they also make money because they are young, they are pretty, they went to Stanford or MIT, they live in Silicone Valley, they had a good idea, they were able to pivot in just the right way, they have no other commitments -- no spouse, no kids, no mortgage -- or ties, etc...

Sure, they "worked until they endangered their health".. but they were also the lucky 0.0001% that had everything else line up so that hard work was all they needed.

Reading this sort of thing is a drag for those of us who do not have any of those advantages. Who try year after year to support a family and also find a business that can actually work out. (got another idea last week... looking to feel out some potential customers ... wish me luck!)

So, uh, yeah.... I should stop reading these kinds of articles

He isn't wrong though. That is a pretty good list of reasons why a large funding round may have happened. They aren't requirements, but they do all help.

The good news is that none of those things ensure a large funding round, and also that large funding rounds aren't needed for a startup to succeed. I don't think anyone would suggest that you shouldn't start a company if you can't check three of those boxes. But you probably shouldn't start a company that needs a $20m Series A just to have a shot.

Also depends on what you consider 'startup success'.

Many of the startups we hear about being acquired doesn't really mean they succeeded. Only means the founders/investors were able to make a quick buck from someone willing to buy it.

It must be quite a 'hollow' success to cash out selling an unproven business model to some bigco.

Don't worry about them. Worry about you. Don't get caught up with where you are now, or what you haven't accomplished in the past. Focus on what you're going to do in the future. Build something you're passionate about, and let that project soak up all your attention.

Whenever I notice my mind getting caught in a similar trap, this always puts me back on track:

http://www.paulgraham.com/start.html

Agreed. And I think "worked until they endangered their health" is unwise and naive. There's no real need in the world to work like that, not in the US, not in the software field. In Africa, to fend off starvation, sure, but not in the US with software skills. Working insane hours may give a boost in the very short term but it's been pretty widely known now that for most people it becomes a big net loss over the longer term due to the negative effects on your health and family and social life. No matter how much money you make (and you may not make much or any at all) you can't really buy those things back past a certain point.

Work smarter and more efficiently. Not necessarily longer or "harder".

At some point everyone was a nobody with none of the above. You can actually start to check some of these boxes off. It's also not some definitive list either. Don't just look at these points, but also look at all the same shit the successful ones went through. Don't give be discouraged.

Yup but I somehow missed noticing following point in your post:

_They got lucky_

Don't you think luck plays (or played) a great amount of role while raising funding?

PS: I define luck not as some sort of divine act but rater being "at the right place at the right time", something which can't be replicated per se.

When someone raises a mammoth Series A before launching, then no. It's almost entirely that they had previous successful startups under their belt, saw a hot market, and were really good at whipping VCs into a lather and creating a market. Luck doesn't do that, skilled fund raising and a hot team and market does. If you took two founders who had separate, large exits previously, and had raised a lot of money before, and were making a startup in location based services, or cloud computing, they'd have a 100% shot at a big round.

When someone raises a large round a year after they launched, which almost always means they got a lot of traction, then possibly.

heh, really funny. My original draft in textmate had that as the last point. I left it out because it's hard to nail down as something replicated/recognizable. It's also sometimes the cause of many of the other points.

It's about the journey also. You may not hit it big but you can damn sure try. I bet all the lessons you learn will help you succeed in whatever you try next

Reply on news.ycombinator.com