Poll: Non-Founders, Why Are You Not Starting a Start-Up?
I am curious as to what are the primary reasons for people who talk about startups not taking the leap.
I work to live, I don't live to work. I flat out refuse to work more than 9-5 and even that is too much. These startups expect you to give them your entire lives, 24 hours a day, and weekends, and eat nothing but ramen.
I don't know about you guys, but I have rent to pay. I need to be paid with real cash, guaranteed. I also need to spend as little time at work as possible in order to earn that cash. I have more important things to do, like sleeping, eating, and spending time with friends and family.
I can almost understand the punk kids who do startups, since they have nothing to lose. I absolutely can not understand the VCs or the rich people who do startups. These people have millions of dollars already. As nice and cool as they may be when you meet them, they are fundamentally in a business of greed. They can already retire to a private tropical island forever, but instead they are going to spend their money making some trivial social web app to squeeze out a few advertising dollars.
That's perhaps the real reason I don't do a startup. Nobody wants to give me money because they know that as soon as the check clears I'll be out the door never to be seen again.
Your answer is based entirely on the premise that working for a startup boils down to killing yourself for the chance to get rich, which couldn't be further from the truth.
The "rich people" who do startups do it because they love building things that solve big problems, the work hours and payouts are, if they're lucky, just a byproduct.
Sure, I'm 24 and I have basically nothing to lose, but really I have no choice - I have to build things. I can't deal with just performing maintenance.
And even if you are ok with just performing maintenance, working in a small team is simply more fun than working at a larger one.
Seriously, reflect more on this. Writing off startups because they're "in a business of greed" is a straw man at best.
I'm working at a small company doing some incredibly cool "building" stuff, and not in maintenance at all - and I get a steady paycheck and good benefits. There doesn't need to be this dichotomy. There are tons of us out there who work 9-5, enjoy life, don't kill ourselves, yet get to build incredibly cool things with small teams of cool people.
Really, the only downside of my job compared to a startup is that I don't have the potential payout of $[millions], and somehow I'm okay with that. The quality of my life is incredibly high, I set my own hours, and yet because we're not busting our ass just to survive I get to stop and smell the roses. It's pretty cool.
Possibly its a bit strongly worded because he's responding to someone who names start up founders as "punk kids" with "nothing to lose", then declares that he's not doing a startup because he's found things that are more important.
Or course I'd much rather receive my $2MM+ over the course of a couple years building a company rather than over 40 years of letting a boss or HR decide my pay.
And you bet when I'm done I'll be investing in even more start-ups. I love helping people with dreams in the tech industry.
I want startup life because I want to own my own company from the ground up.
I would love to set my own hours at a normal company. But how rare is that? Where do you work that you can do that?
What, you didn't read any of the ten thousand or so posts on here about burnout, 70 hour work weeks, or PG's opus on how doing a startup packs an entire career worth of work into three or four years?
Incidentally, your prima dona attitude towards maintenance makes you a serious liability on anything larger than a look-what-I-wrote-over-the-weekend web app. Children want to play in the sandbox all day. Mature programmers embrace the entire software lifecycle. I bet you don't write documentation or tests either.
"Writing off startups because they're "in a business of greed" is a straw man at best."
Strawman? I'm not sure that means what you think it means. I dealt with a lot of entrepreneurs during my consulting days. I mean a lot. Seriously. Like an entire fuckton of them. Some where looking to build something truly awesome. Others where just enamored of the idea of being an entrepreneur, with no real conceptualization of what that meant, and no business-worthy idea to build upon. The only common denominator among them was this: they where all looking to drag off a huge pile of cash once the project launched.
Do I think there's anything wrong with dragging off a huge pile of cash? Of course not, I definitely enjoyed dragging off small piles of their cash and would have enjoyed it even more if the piles had been larger. Is that a greed-based incentive? Clearly. Ergo the "business of greed".
Also, anythign I did build would be something that would make the world a better place. Some startups do try to change the world for the better. Most are just doing some advertising, social nonsense, crappy games, or something else completely trivial and useless as a money-grab.
Just because something is "advertising" or "social" does not mean that it is "completely trivial and useless". Very few big problems are solved in one fell swoop. Most of them are overcome by thousands of people chipping away at various parts of them at the same time.
You're right, they totally left out invasive, obnoxious and manipulative.
vs.
>Most are just doing some advertising, social nonsense, crappy games, or something else completely trivial and useless as a money-grab.
>But I would only make things I cared about, at my own pace, and for free.
vs.
>Also, anythign I did build would be something that would make the world a better place.
It's like you waver between taking a self serving "Take-the-money-and-run" attitude and complaints that others are in business solely for greed.
I don't know if I'm more blown away by that, or your cynicism toward startups. Ideas that are trivial and useless are not going to make money. However, ideas that YOU find trivial and useless could very well make money.
I think it's important to consider the viewpoints of others and perhaps while Farmville brings no joy to your life, it doesn't mean it can't be a fun and rewarding experience to someone else.
Also, their wealth was probably caused by their attitude toward work and entrepreneurship, not the other way around.
+1. I like HN but I don't understand why the size of the business / method of funding matters so much, as opposed to what is being done, unless I put on my cynic hat. Once affixed, I realize it's because getting millions in VC (rather than grinding for it) and then selling out to an established player, or selling before the IPO, is incredibly sexy.
A really safe business strategy is to become a middle man who allows other organizations to operate smoothly. You then sidestep having to take a stance on any major issue and make money off other people using the service to do something truly remarkable.
By no means am I familiar with all of YC's businesses but the ones on the front page are basically infrastructure applications. While neat, it seems like the sexiest businesses are ones where you don't actually make something, but you make a tool for someone else to make something. FogCreek sells, among others, a bug tracker, a closed version of an open dvcs, and a Windows RDP clone. Dropbox syncs files and revisions across computers. Others let you create database wrappers ("forms"), create blogs, or find incredibly expensive travel accommodations. I am a user or I want to be a user of most of them, actually, but I'd be lying if I said they are revolutionary or useful on their own.
They're safe business strategies with incredibly intelligent, motivated people at the helm. Now, won't those intelligent, motivated people stop working on cat-pictures projects? I'd do something but I'm too stupid so I'm relying on smart people to change the world.
EDIT:
I know FogCreek isn't a YC venture. I made a really poor segue into talking about businesses with the startup mentality I read about, not specifically YC ones. Oy, what a day.
Also the thought that your job and paycheck is guaranteed is an illusion. We have seen it time and time again: loyal, hard-working employees get kicked out of a job they worked 20 years just because the company is "re-structuring". Unless you're very specialized and non-replaceable, you're at risk, too. The risk is WAY lower than starting and succeeding with a startup, but still.
So why become an entrepreneur instead of developing technology in an R&D lab? Three reasons: change the world, make customers’ lives better and create an organization of lasting value. If you only want to do one of these things, there are better options. But only startups combine all three.
Making money is a fuel to a goal, not a goal in itself. As Tim O'Reilly[2] put it very well:
You should regard money as fuel for what you really want to do, not as a goal in and of itself. Money is like gas in the car -- you need to pay attention or you'll end up on the side of the road -- but a well-lived life is not a tour of gas stations!
[1] http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/2009/10/myth-entreprene...
[2] http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/01/work-on-stuff-that-matters-...
Why do all these commenters seem to think you need a for profit company in order to make things? The Internet is nothing but billions of things that have been made for free in people's spare time. I want nothing more than infinite spare time to make whatever I please as I please as I relax in a tropical paradise with the people I care about. Startups are the opposite of that.
It's ok that you have a different mentality, but understand that it's just that, a different mentality. Some people enjoy the hustle and bustle of building organizations more than lounging on tropical beaches for the rest of their lives.
1) They enjoy work, even if they are working on something that is seemingly trivial. 2) One million dollars is not enough. Nor is 10. In fact, most people that earn a few million rarely retire after that. It is more a game of power, fame, and (possibly) goodwill than wealth. Bill Gates could have retired much earlier, but instead he amassed a huge amount of wealth and started one of the world's biggest charities (the Gates Foundation). Warren Buffet spends very little on himself - he owns one house that he bought for a small sum of money, and he gave 99 percent of his money to the Gates Foundation.
That said, there is a fine line between the "punk kids" (who are usually the designers and developers) and the founders in larger companies. Founders in their second, third, and etc...companies typically have very comfortable lifestyles.
If you give a few million to random person, 99% chance he/she will retire. However, people who EARN few million rarely retire. I imagine that's precisely the difference between those who make it and those who don't.
It's not for everyone, and I am not saying you should think like the above, but please try to appreciate that some people actually do think like that.
My main cost is opportunity; I could easily make 200-400k/yr consulting or working somewhere else. I have enough savings and lifestyle hacks to live pretty comfortably while working on the startup, and we've raised enough money to pay ourselves minimal salaries too once we decide to do so.
If someone gave me $5mm cash, I'd be working on exactly the same thing -- the only difference is I'd go on $30-40k of vacations per year vs. maybe $5k, and I'd possibly invest in some other startups.
I don't think I'd be willing to work on a random social media ad network or facebook game for $250k/yr now or after getting $5mm, but if you're working on problems you genuinely care about, and a startup is the best way to solve those problems, I don't see why money would be much of a factor (as long as you could subsist).
I spent 5-10h/wk doing work-related things I wouldn't do otherwise (meeting with VCs or vendors, mainly); the rest of my time is spent working with people I like on problems I want to solve.
I mean, I’ll always be grateful for my startup experience but I’m man enough to admit it was pointless. We built a product, spent our whole time trying to convince people our product was worthwhile, eventually convinced someone who bought the product and then watched the product be squandered.
So the founders got a decent amount of money. The first employees (aka Me) got a smaller but still decent amount of money. And we all went on our merry way.
But I didn’t accomplish a damn thing during that time. My work was flushed down the toilet and half my time was spent trying to get media coverage. I accomplish more in one day of my current job than I did in the whole year I was in the valley because in my current job people use the fruits of my labor instantly.
Again, I’m not complaining. I like what I do now and I couldn’t do it if not for the money I received then. I’ll always be grateful. But as someone who wants to make a difference in the world I don’t see a startup as the way to do that anymore.
If I did end up being a founder again, I'd definitely be a technical one (the distinction didn't exist so much in the past). If it has to do with something that isn't code/design/architecture/etc... it's the other founders issue. I could go for that.
But setting the right expectations as an employee isn't a bad thing either. My funnest experience in the work world was actually working for a big company on a product I enjoyed. I loved the work and really focused solely on the product. I really haven't had a chance to do that since.
Also remember a lot of folks are more interested in the Hacker side of things, not just startup stuff.
"At a startup all your challenges are external. At a big company, all your challenges are internal".
Fwiw, I started a startup that was acquired so I'm also incented to stick around so that probably biases my thinking a bit too.
OTOH maybe I am involved in doing a startup - just not the kind of startup YC talks about all the time. I'm an artist who spends most of her time hanging around her studio (or occasionally out in a coffee shop with the laptop) drawing weird sci-fi comics and trying to build a large enough audience to make a sustainable living off of my art. Somewhere way down the line there's the big brass ring of "movie deals" but I ain't holding my breath.
There are nice things about it. It's great to be able to completely push work out of my mind. Barring extreme emergency, I refuse to even think about work when off the clock--that's what work hours are for.
In the shower, I think about how the hot water feels on my neck. In my spare time, I make things that I am utterly not good at making, and never will be (e.g., homemade furniture). I don't mentally evaluate every dinner out with my wife against what I could be doing with that time.
That certainly isn't how it was when I was running my own startups.
A relatively generous and reliable salary is also a boon, especially as I plow through my fourth decade of life and start doing things like buying a house and producing offspring.
Having said all that, I'm almost certain to try another startup (or two? three?) in the future.
But it is refreshing to take a decade (or two? three?) and focus on other things.
I'm mid 30s, married and kids and bills to pay, but I am still making the jump because I'm incredibly passionate about my idea.
I don't know what this would fall under, but I have a full-time job and also sell things that I write/build on the side. It's not a startup. I sell tutorials and apps and make pretty good money (I could quit my job, but my job is a lot of fun) from it. It's odd that this build-products-and-make-money-on-the-side avenue is skipped over in these and other discussions.
TL,DR: startup + other job + family = didn't work for me.
So far I've identified a niche with a real pain point... people in my wife's industry have to perform a (unregulated) task each month. This takes them between 4hours and 2 full days to complete. There's existing competition and I think I could do way better.
Today I got signoff from my day job that they will not steal this project from me sometime in the future.
So... foundation laid.
I have a good, basic, understanding of the problem domain and have a domain expert (hi honey!) to guide my efforts.
Now it's a matter of building the first prototype and watch her try to use it.
Will submit a ShowHN once I have a usable tool and validated the business model.
Wish me luck!
For anyone who is looking for an idea, is a hacker, and lives in SF - I have an idea for a startup and am looking for a cofounder. Email me (in my profile) for more information. I am looking for someone who is interested in virtual goods/currency and the free-to-play gaming model.
Some people don't want A...they want B. B is a bit more difficult to find for some.
The point is a lot of these initial startup ideas aren't going to be game changers but with the right team in place and rapid iteration, they stand a good chance of evolving their companies into game changers.
Yeah. Not shooting for the stars. I'm just looking for a base hit to build some confidence.
At the moment, I'm 24 years old (I hated typing the 24 I was 23 only yesterday). I'm in a fortunate but also unfortunate position. I've got a freehold house (mortgage free) but I've got a ton of expenses from my family oh and an ill parent to look after. I've paid down the mortgage on this house completely and I pay for every single thing in this house and my own living expenses.
I've worked in two very very hot start-ups in v.sexy sectors. You've probably heard of both. Unfortunately, I just left college and the positions aren't exactly lucrative but the opportunities to learn are formidable. So for me 'life's ability' to try isn't available due to financial constraints.
I've two options either a) start my own thing or b) join someone else's start-up at the founder or first 2-3 senior hire positions.
At present I'd prefer to do my own thing and being in a full time job is needed. Real estate is an awful investment esp if it is your ONLY investment like it is for most people. I'd much prefer to be in a position i was in 4 years ago with a solid portfolio of liquid investments.
However, I realise a business is a brilliant investment, probably the best especially if its cash generative.
My long term goal actually is venture capital so either way I need solid operating experience to break in.
So, thats really whats holding me back but fortunately, I've got time on my side :)
I just lack of a technical co-founder. I'm too busy drafting up executive summaries, figuring out monetization strategies, making contacts, researching multiple methods of capital acquisition, and marking up preliminary prototype web interfaces to sit down and learn ruby :(
I even have a background in Digital Media & IT, server & database setup, and network administration, as well as working knowledge of calculus, physics, simple data structures & programming fundamentals, and basic digital / analog circuits. On top of that I had a minor (almost second major) in business, with a focus on entrepreneurship, finance, and venture capital.
And despite all that I'm still a super social person :) I've come to the conclusion that I just really need to learn ruby myself, because a technical partner in the southeast is difficult to come by.
I actually recently considered publishing all my ideas in an attempt to attract co-founders.
I've seen too many friends run around in circles jumping from project to project, failure to failure. 37signals likes to cite a Stanford (?) study that founders who have failed are statistically no more likely to succeed than first time founders. Only successful founders have a statistical leg up when starting a new venture. I don't believe that a large-scale, I'm-gonna-go-out-and-raise project necessarily teaches you anything. It's sort of like the big show - you should have rehearsed beforehand.
That said, that doesn't mean I'm not learning. I think you can learn a ton from hacks/little projects, like Kyle Bragger's tinyproj. Having users for a product does not a startup make, but I think you can learn a lot from that experience. I'm also working my way through a massive stack of management theory/software development/hacking books that I know I'll never read once I actually start a company.
A lot of successful founders I know had significant work histories at startups or otherwise before starting something. I don't have that yet.
Some day, I would quite like to strike out on my own and sustain myself off the games I make. Live the "indie dream". But right now I have a job with a large degree of creative freedom, where I get to practice my craft. I don't have to stress about the financial aspects, I don't have the immediate pressure of "ship-or-starve" and I don't have to worry about the things I make when I'm not working making any money. If they do, fantastic! But if they are only interesting, then I have still won.
Just like these.
Personally, I find all of it interesting (tech, business, politics), but have no tech expertise, and would like to learn more of the hustle.
Being a student has its downsides.
I was a programmer. I hated it. I make less than half what I used to. It's awesome.
That said, if I can't pull this off for some reason, I'll probably move out to the Valley and roll the dice.
That's my answer to the poll as well. All the extra stuff that seems to go into a start-up (knowing about finances and advertising and networking...?) - I'd rather be programming.
You might ask why I would not go out and seek funding. Simply put, I do not think many people would fund me, and those who would probably would want to slightly redirect the path of my work. The only things I enjoy working on are those that are risky, unproven, and complex - all things that investors hate.
Not easy indeed! I don't like my job, yet cannot cut loose from the daily cocoon that I'm used to.
and I'm not starting them up because I don't have enough discipline yet to go spend enough time working(Im a remote coder) to have free time later to work on my own stuff... I always end up spending my whole day between work and procrastinating, then I work more to compensate my procrastination, sleep late, wake up late...etc
:(
I guess I'll have to get stronger so I can just say "no thanks" and move on to what I really want to do.
Then inspiration struck.
Mind blowing.
I have tons of ideas, but they're all crap. If I'm going to work 'startup hard' at something, it's certainly not going to be another social/gaming/fotm diversion.
Contrary to popular opinion, ideas do matter. If you decide to base a startup on one, you have to decide whether it's worth devoting three or so years of your life to implementing it, with the goal of world-class execution, and all the work and sacrifice that entails. None of my ideas have yet passed muster in that regard.
If you're going to work as hard at an unoriginal, uninspired idea as you would at a truly world-changing idea, then better to hold out for the latter (unless you just want to use the former to get practice). There are some truly world changing things going on in tech, like cryptocurrency and 3D printing, that are (or may soon be) more worth building something around. I'm holding out for that.
On building around future tech, you probably want to start building (or at least planning) in anticipation or you may have to play catch up when once the tech becomes available.