Middle-aged entrepreneurs are more successful than young ones | Hacker News Reader

Middle-aged entrepreneurs are more successful than young ones

weforum.org

48 pointsleonagano20 comments

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16794228.

I have very very little doubt that the sum of the total revenue of all companies started by middle-aged entrepreneurs divided by the number of them (the average) is greater than the average revenue from companies started by young people. What I'm curious about is whether or not young people tend to create revolutionary companies with more frequency than older people, especially if you ignore factors that sort of make the game an "unfair" comparison, like older entrepreneurs having better access to capital (e.g. self funded) or all the things a network can help you with.

This graphic shows a 3% difference in success (although it is a nearly 4 fold difference). Overall, Only 1-4 % of entrepreneurs succeeed according to this article at any age.

Maybe you can share an example of revolutionary? Many tech revolutions had a previous incarnation.

On age:

One has to decide if it's easier to learn 20 years worth in 5-10 years from someone more experienced, or waste one's own time learning it before innovating. I think mentoring is good and a turbo boost for innovating.

New entrepreneurs and innovators can tend to seek more permission and validation from others than those who are closer to just making value happen for clients.

There seems to be less of a gap between what you are calling middle aged vs someone in their 20's. Today's 40 year olds have grown up on the internet 10-20 years longer than today's digital natives as creators, but also know how to interface with the pre-internet world and powerholders. It's really a valuable 2 way relationship.

Ageism is silly against any age, because it just slows down innovation and the exchange of knowledge and insight.

I started as an entrepreneur when I was 19, and the feelings of people not getting it are normal, so it can be of value to learn to build and level up to meet the future you see. Luckily innovation cycles are shortening.

Are first-time middle-aged entrepreneurs more successful than young ones?

If you dig in, a lot of the advantage is niche specific knowledge and experience. So a first time entrepuner who knows his corner of the world exceedingly well is more likely to succeed than a 30 yr old Babson grad who learned about the problem via Mail Chimp.

I hated hearing this when I was 20. It's got some truth to it.

CEO/Startup/Business skills come with time, at 20 I just wanted to build, like a beast.

Transferable business skills though, came from creating and transacting value with others, be it through a career to learn how a business works, freelancing, contracting, consulting, etc.

I tried to spend 10 years leveling up to get 20 years of experience. Experience in remaining learning open-minded, learning to focus on the right things, and being effective does seem to set one up differently to add and create value.

The kool-aid machine, however seems to want to take away a person's 20's for much less. Investors who value genuine founder development as much as the product development are extremely valuable.

Experienced business owners are more successful than inexperienced ones.

That's not too surprising.

Depends on who you're selling to.

If you're selling to young people, and you're old, it helps if you're in advertising or producing pop culture or otherwise connected to the zeitgeist.

If you're selling to businesses, experience and contacts in the industry vertical are huge.

> Depends on who you're selling to.

I didn't see that dependency in the article.

Do you have a source?

It’s basically important to understand the market for your product.

If you want to build a cool social media app you probably want to be a young kid who understands how to build something cool for other kids.

In business you need to solve a problem and have the ear of the people who need that problem solved to build a business.

I'm curious to see if the number of companies a person starts has any notable impact. Older entrepreneurs in theory have had multiple endeavors, and failed multiple times, so they either get lucky, or learn from their mistakes.

Plus, more likely to inherit additional funds/property from deceased relatives.

VC money has been falling off trees for the past 7 years and with capital needs to bootstrap something have never been lower. Startup failure because of lack of access to capital is probably as close to a non-issue as possible. It's about conception/planning and execution.

Obvious headline is obvious.

"Entrepreneurs with experience, money and connections are more successful than those who aren't."

Experience? :)

But that flies in the face of the rampant ageism I've internalized!

Ageism absolutely exists when looking for jobs in other companies. Age doesn't really matter when you start your OWN business.

Less time for mess ups - more awareness of what you are getting into.

I would wager far less middle aged people try a business though.

Yet another example of people being confused by statistics. This story has been written and posted on HN a hundred times. It's always a failure to distinguish which type of business is being discussed.

The data for innovative technology startups is going to be very different from almost everything else. Comparing the businesses that Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Mark Zuckerberg started to consulting companies or restaurants makes absolutely no sense.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com