The "Me, Too" Startup Syndrome
funtrepreneur.tumblr.com
funtrepreneur.tumblr.com
Every time the author makes a, "he" statement, you can just perceive a subtle, "but not me." The faintest signal for both the reader, and for himself. Here's what I read:
- "I let a long sigh." (Because I know better).
- "My friend wasn’t someone I’d call 'entrepreneurial'" (...but I am).
- "He wasn’t doing it because he enjoyed the process of starting and growing a company." (But I am).
- "But building a company requires a lot more than writing code." (All things I'm far more capable of).
- "He’s lived in Silicon Valley long enough, and that’s what people around him are doing." (Me? I'm an island).
Who is the author to make this judgement? Why do you need to fit some mold in order to participate in the exclusive club, without criticism from the author? And who gets to determine what that mold is?
The issue I take with this type of writing is that, at best, it's pointless. And at its worst, it's desctuctive.
Pointless - It's not fact based. It presents no new, compelling ideas. It's not helpful for practical purposes, or optimistic for inspirational ones. What's the point? Why was it written? (For the authors sake, I think.)
Destructive - It draws lines and separates classes, the higher of which the author subtly places himself in while condescending the hopeless "friend". Where would we be on our own startup journeys if our "friends" were so (not) supportive?
And this, by the way, is where someone gets to call me and my comments out for being super hypocritical ;) </irony>
In this case, if the friend follows their "me too" path and "succeeds", the author's beliefs about the "right" path would be shown to be unfounded. Of course at this point the author has invested, as stated in the post, five years of time and energy on this path and is unsurprisingly going to be reluctant to admit there may have been another path that could have taken him to the same destination with a lower time and energy investment. Instead, the author intellectualizes and rationalizes his choices to prevent acknowledging the uncomfortable truth.
There's a mentally healthier way of dealing with this: acknowledge there are multiple paths, and acknowledge that destinations are multi-variate. For example, what does the friend want as a destination, just money? Maybe the author wants something more - experience, satisfaction of starting their own business, etc. It's dysfunctional to suggest the friend should choose the same destination as the author; once this is accepted, you can happily get on with your choice of path and not worry that others have made different choices. Occasionally, of course, you will find somebody has arrived at the same destination you desire with less time and energy -- at that point, set aside your ego and learn from them!
I don't think he was being as critical of the path chosen but more so of why the friend decided to start the journey to begin with. I might be misinterpreting things though.
"Listen. It’s never been easier to start a company. And right now, money is thrown left and right. In the past year alone, six of my colleagues left my company to start their own startups. I figured if they can do it, I can too."
OP didn't like that answer and skipped past it, and I'm playing psychoanalyst by wondering why.
Just playing devils advocate here.
2. I disagree that it presents no new compelling idea. What is not new to you and me maybe new to someone else. Helpful or not is very much in the eye of the reader and what they end up doing with that information and how they interpret and manage it. There are merits to the post whether or not you agree with them or whether you think there are any to begin with.
3. While I totally agree that at the end of the day, the decision to do something resides with the decision maker, I also acknowledge that what the author points out as "me too" syndrome do exist to an extent and in many ways that can in fact be harmful as well.
4. I do agree its never good to be condescending but I don't believe that was the intention here. You asked where would we on our own startup journey if our friends were not so supportive. While I do agree as a whole, I also believe that a great friend doesn't always blindly support their friend. Sometimes being a friend simply means having the courage to point out where your concerns are and why you are concerned. In the end, the support is to allow your friend to take that information and go about making the choices he or she needs to make. While the author didn't dive into this (what he did or didn't discuss with his friend beyond what was posted), I have a hard time believing they made this post with a condescending tone over trying to help others (the readers) see what may be obvious to you and me but may not be to many.
That's the ticket right there.
When friends and friends-of-friends have expressed a curiosity into startups, I treat them with the same respect I would hope for. Very clear - forceful even - about the risks and challenges of entrepreneurship, and very, very critical about ideas (but always with the "...but who am I?" disclaimer). But overall, I try and default to being supportive and encouraging.
It's not charity either. There are absolutely selfish benefits behind being supportive. Like Guy Kawasaki or Keith Ferrazzi would point out - the more helpful you are, the more valuable your network. It's impossible to quantify, but being supportive early on is just the best thing for everyone involved.
"Most of your companies will fail. And now that I've said that, you're all feeling sorry for everyone else in the room."
Honestly, I encourage my friends to take risks and try new things, even if I have inner doubts about their ability to pull it off. I do so because I think that trying something really, really hard improves you skill set -- even if you end up failing.
If a friend said, "I'm going to try and get into the Olympics!" would you tell them all the ways they're likely to fail? Or would you encourage them to try and achieve a dream? The key is not understating the risks; be both encouraging and honest.
1. We are in a bubble, because all these 'useless' startups are getting funding when they should not be (debatable on many levels).
2. Too many startups are focusing on areas that are over like 'Social'.
3. Some people just aren't good enough or cut out for this, so they should avoid it, and let the ones with a specific set of 'opinions' create startups.
My advise to anyone also sensing this theme and turning away from creating a startup is this:
Do it for whatever reason you want!
If you want to make a great product, and love hacking, awesome! Go for it!
If you want to get rich and jump in, awesome! Go for it!
There are no guarantees in life about whether anyone will succeed, but there is also not infinite time to wonder what might have been. Even if 90% of these ventures fail, there will still be more great products and opportunities for everyone. Because that crazy 10% wasn't deterred by someone else telling them what should and shouldn't be. Cautionary tales help to educate, but don't be discouraged by anyone if you really want to do it.
Likely, if you start a company for the wrong reasons, you will find out very quickly and will quit within a couple months. You will pursue more standard forms of employment and be FAR happier about it.
I say, if you want to start a company for whatever reason... do it!
See, I like to think of a startup as any other brick and mortar business. If it manages to leap into a world-wide success, nothing wrong with that - but don't expect it. Have a game plan that focuses on the reality around you. A startup isn't always a Facebook or Instagram (although they were too, at a point). It's okay to build an online business and just make $60-120 k/year - you know, like any other B&M business owner. To me a "startup" is simply described as a scaleable model that employs technology intelligently with modern-day principals of delegation, pivoting & management.
I always get confused about exit strategy. To some it means here's what happens when/if I bail.... To others it seems to mean this is where I'll be a billionaire and.... Both are bunk to someone who is passionately building a product or service that they love.
The problem is that a lot of startups don't seem to have any plan in place to actually get to the point where they're actually making money on their own. The B&M store comparison is pretty apt here. You don't start a corner convenience store in the hopes that 7-Eleven will come up and buy you. You start the store because there isn't a store there, in the hope that enough people will come and buy stuff that you can make a profit.
That's where a lot of the worry is, I think. Especially because we're seeing a huge amount of VC funding going towards startups that are almost purely pinned on getting snapped up by a bigger company. Instagram is a great example of this. They have a product that has the majority of the current midshare in it's space, has millions of users, is a very cool application on both a technical usability level... and approximately $0 in incoming revenue. And no plan to make money besides "Maybe get advertisers on the platform at some point in the future"(http://behindcompanies.com/2012/04/instagrams-business-model... )[1]. From an investment perspective, it was a very bad investment... until they sold out to Facebook, at which point it was a GREAT one.
I think that's the concern that TFA has. A lot of startups, by and large, have turned into R&D for large corporations rather than traditional entrepreneurial businesses. The concern isn't that people are creating a product that's sold. They're creating a product without any concern about how to make money with it, and are hoping that someone with deep pockets will snap them up. There's a time and place for both, but the second shouldn't be getting nearly as much money as the first.
[1]To be fair, I think that with 30 million users, Instagram would have a viable business model based on advertising, and certainly could have made a profit. The problem, though, is that I don't think that model would return anywhere near the amount that the $500MM valuation indicated. Certainly, it would be in the low tens of millions of dollars, but not in the hundreds.
That line was the best part in your writeup.
In the spirit of hacking, I've tried to improve it (and please help me if I've done this wrong or poorly!):
Twas the Y-Comb deadline eve, when all through the valley
All the hackers were stirring (it's a big night for Cali!).
Scores of applications were POST'ed with care
In hopes they'd be found by Paul Graham to be fair.
And many a partner slumbered softly in bed,
while visions of A-rounds flooded their SO's heads.
Quite out of the blue my iPhone did ring:
an old friend to a bar for a convo I'd bring!- Are you kidding? It’s an awesome opportunity: you get to mingle with smart people, work on something exciting, get funding and mentorship, investors will chase you to give you money, and you’re much more likely get acquired in the future.
- That’s not what I meant. I know YC is a great place. But why do YOU want to get in?"
"why do YOU want to get in?" The question was answered.
So, don't worry about whether or not your friend is starting a business for the right reasons. He'll figure it out.
Your productivity will increase when you focus on your own goals instead of others.
"And a few girlfriends slept alone in their beds While visions of exits danced in their boyfriends’ heads"
I'm male, but let me tell you that the above statement infuriates me as it perpetuates the stereotype that women are not entrepreneurs. I'm sure I'm not the only one who believes that my better half would be wildly more successful than I would be if she had an inkling to do a startup.
To reiterate, this form of sexism needs to stop.
Can you spot the irony in this statement?
Irony would only exist if I made a sweeping comment about all women being better as entrepreneurs, which I assure you, I did not make.
You see, you resent the implication that women don't do startups. Your girlfriend doesn't do startups and doesn't have the inclination to do them. You are using her as an example (albeit a poor one) of why that implication is false.
I'll start by dispelling a simple one:
Better half doesn't necessarily equate to girlfriend.
Furthermore, the condescending tone and verbiage used in the reply is nothing more than inflammatory. I would disservice myself to continue responding past this point.
The original post was talking about girlfriends, so contextually it sounded like you meant girlfriend by "better half". You're a terrible spokesman for ending sexism as you seem to replace one form of ignorance for another combined with hypersensitivity (having said that, yes the original "joke" was a lame one).
Is that irony? (I've always had a hard time with that question)
It's probably better to use something generic to represent the general case.
Other "me too" activities: marriage, children, golf, smoking, religion, tantric sex... sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't. All a part of life.
Companies fail for all sorts of reasons that are often well beyond their control. Being part of such a team is hardly the kiss of death provided you can explain what you did and what you learned.
You lose 100% of the games you never play. Go into it with your eyes open that more than likely you won't be the next instagram, but you will develop many skills can be broadly applied outside of starting a company. With the right attitude it doesn't matter if you strike it rich, because frequently good ideas(supersonic air travel, concord ) lose and a lot of seemingly bad ideas have made people wealthy(pet rocks).
(Yes, these are all actual words people use, though for different things. Punning on "fun" seems irresistible. With apologies for the self-link, more on the 2nd one: http://www.kmjn.org/notes/funsultants_and_gamification.html)
Doesn't "...And a few girlfriends slept alone in their beds, While visions of exits danced in their boyfriends’ heads..." operate on the same presumption that has resulted in a number of others getting their asses handed to them recently?
Besides... the poem said "a few girlfriends...". I am quite sure that this is a very accurate statement. Of the "Thousands of applications" that were submitted I imagine that enough of them were from men that a few of them had girlfriends that slept alone that night. Why does it have to be taken to the extreme and interpreted as "all these women sleeping away as all the men (and only the men) go off to start companies and get rich"?
I don't suggest you complain to your non-white, non-male friends about that...
#IngrainedPrejudice #DeathByAThousandCuts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camel%27s_nose
And not that it really matters since we aren't supposed to be looking at race/gender but yes... white & male. And just to round out the trifecta... from (what probably would have been considered at that time) a working/middle class family to boot. So maybe the worst indignity I've suffered was that when it came time to go to college there wasn't anybody looking to help me. Thankfully my grades were good enough because they don't give many grants and scholarships to middle class white males. But I'm getting over that the best I can. I don't complain about it every chance I get anymore.
But let's not get trapped by this silly notion that only white people are racist and only males are sexist. I've been labeled all sorts of things by all sorts of people. For instance... someone who doesn't even know me recently called me an indifferent, ignorant white man. I'm still standing.