Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Steve Jobs' memo to startups

omis.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 133 posts

Re: Steve Jobs' memo to startups

#61

Post by andrewljohnson »

gizmo wrote: post #51
pg wrote: post #24

I can't say he was mistaken, since he was only saying he disliked it. But I don't think there's anything wrong with selling a company at any stage. Steve's problem with selling seemed to be that you're shirking work by doing it. But that isn't necessarily, or even usually, true. A lot of people who sell startups go on to do other things, and often bigger things. If we were still running Viaweb, we could not have star…

Then the interesting question is: would you be willing to sell YC in the next couple of years if the price is right? (My hunch is that you're not going to sell YC anytime soon -- even though you probably could sell it -- simply because you're not done yet.)

I don't think YC can be sold. Too much of what makes YC special is tied up in pg and interpersonal connections with angels and other investors in SV. I don't think you could just hand off the process to a VC firm or something and expect to get the same level of applicants.

Maybe someday that won't be true, and maybe I'm wrong today, but my hunch says that once it's sold, it will begin to decline, and everyone who might consider buying it knows that.

Re: Steve Jobs' memo to startups

#62

Post by pg »

gizmo wrote: post #51
pg wrote: post #24

I can't say he was mistaken, since he was only saying he disliked it. But I don't think there's anything wrong with selling a company at any stage. Steve's problem with selling seemed to be that you're shirking work by doing it. But that isn't necessarily, or even usually, true. A lot of people who sell startups go on to do other things, and often bigger things. If we were still running Viaweb, we could not have star…

Then the interesting question is: would you be willing to sell YC in the next couple of years if the price is right? (My hunch is that you're not going to sell YC anytime soon -- even though you probably could sell it -- simply because you're not done yet.)

YC is different. We didn't even think of it as a company at first, just an interesting project. It has turned out to be one of those cases where a side project takes over your life (sort of like Facebook, though much more gradual), but that wasn't planned. We just kept getting more applications and either had to grow or start rejecting people we thought were good.

I never considered what I'd do if someone wanted to buy YC, because companies like YC aren't buyable. But even if someone wanted to buy it I could not imagine selling it, because I don't need the money and it wouldn't be worth the risk that the acquirer would ruin it.

Re: Steve Jobs' memo to startups

#63

Post by nirvana »

snarfy wrote: post #19

This from the guy who took the $5000 for breakout after Woz stayed up for 4 days straight fixing design issues caused by bad specs from Jobs. Fucking managers.

Do you have a citation for the "design issues" thing, or are you just making that up?

It was over 4 days because Bushnell needed the game fast. The design was completely in Woz's hands and the incentive was to do it with as few chips as possible, also from Bushnell.

Your claim that Jobs took all the money is a lie. The allegation is he split the original fee with Woz exactly as promised, and simply never told Woz about the bonus. The whole amount was less than $5,000.

It amazes me that people are such Apple haters that they will resort to making up such lies in order to bash the guy who created the personal computer industry (along with woz) and helped create everything from the switching power supply to the smartphone.

Re: Steve Jobs' memo to startups

#64

Post by omarchowdhury »

anon808 wrote: post #48
middus wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with looking to make a quick buck without having to work hard for it in the first place?

There's no rules, you can do whatever you want. But i think a lot of people have realized history shows the get rich quick type of folks tend not to actually contribute anything to human progress and more often than not are looking to take advantage of others for their own gain (allowing them to save time to riches). My question: Why would I ever want to deal with anyone like that, and why would anyone else?

Maybe one needs to take care of their own progress before they can take care of others?

Re: Steve Jobs' memo to startups

#65

Post by llambda »

pg wrote: post #24

I can't say he was mistaken, since he was only saying he disliked it. But I don't think there's anything wrong with selling a company at any stage. Steve's problem with selling seemed to be that you're shirking work by doing it. But that isn't necessarily, or even usually, true. A lot of people who sell startups go on to do other things, and often bigger things. If we were still running Viaweb, we could not have star…

It seems to me a silly assumption that selling is somehow a form of giving up: if you stay forever with one thing you might miss an opportunity to do something even more powerful; for Steve I suppose Apple is the exception to that rule, but even so he had influence with NeXT and Pixar while absent from it, albeit a forced absence.

Indeed selling might just be the necessary antecedent to the next big thing.

Re: Steve Jobs' memo to startups

#66

Post by pg »

kenjackson wrote: post #44
pg wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this may be the one you mean: http://paulgraham.com/prcmc.html

That is the one. Looked right at the name in the list of essays and skipped it. Thanks Paul. Good to reread.

It's an awkward title (I had to think myself "What was that one called?") but if I gave it the obvious title it would spoil the surprise ending.

Re: Steve Jobs' memo to startups

#67

Post by HSO »

antimora wrote: post #34

From the Economics stand point, overall it's good that there are small start-ups whose sole purpose to succeed in some specialized area and later be bought off by a larger company that can use in some strategic maneuver. This is analogous to X-prize factor. In fact, Apple has benefited tremendously by buying off companies to enhance its products (e.g. touch screen). Had everyone out there decided to build long sustai…

This is a very good point.

Also, in my case, I know that there are some things I'd like to do that are almost impossible to do when you're small or it would be a complete waste to reinvent the wheel.

Some biggies already have the technology I'd need to get closer to my dream, so I think the ideal path is to keep developing and getting a high profile in a niche that is under the radar and not easily replicable, and scope out potential buyers, not just by money offered but by product/vision fit.

In short, it's a mental thing, not what happens on contract paper, that counts.

Re: Steve Jobs' memo to startups

#68

Post by textlaundry »

Apple wouldn't be alive without the existence of so-called "Cash Startups". The entire iLife suite, Siri, and a host of their other products came from buying out small companies. I wonder how Steve would have responded if the Dropbox guys showed him that quote in their negotiations.

Re: Steve Jobs' memo to startups

#69

Post by izak30 »

pg wrote: post #55
veyron wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What he's criticizing is doing a startup specifically so that it could be flipped later. If you are in it to build a real company, you actually go through the hard work that Jobs is talking about. Did you start viaweb to sell it to someone else later, or did you start it to build an actual sustainable business?

We started it to sell. We were not interested in online stores. Some of the problems were kind of interesting, but neither I nor Robert nor Trevor thought of Viaweb as our life's work. Incidentally, building a business to sell doesn't mean it can't be sustainable. Viaweb made Yahoo lots of money.

You attacked that sort of thinking a couple of times at Startup School events. In certain ways, it was troublesome, because I like to think that's the sort of person I am, or the business that I want to start. But now hearing you say again (paraphrase) "we did it this way, and we liked some of the problems, but really we thought it was just a great opportunity" is promising. Is what you're trying to say, that the 'best' startups are usually founded by people who have deep emotional ties about the problems they're solving? (say, anybots, facebook, google) but that it can still work with the right people and the right ideas/timing (viaweb, slide, FriendFeed(?)).

IF YCs stance is to pick the former as much as possible (or all the time). What can a valley outsider do to get the later started?

Sorry, this is the type of question I would have loved to ask at startup school, it just took a couple of days to formulate.

Re: Steve Jobs' memo to startups

#70

Post by gizmo »

pg wrote: post #62
gizmo wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the interesting question is: would you be willing to sell YC in the next couple of years if the price is right? (My hunch is that you're not going to sell YC anytime soon -- even though you probably could sell it -- simply because you're not done yet.)

YC is different. We didn't even think of it as a company at first, just an interesting project. It has turned out to be one of those cases where a side project takes over your life (sort of like Facebook, though much more gradual), but that wasn't planned. We just kept getting more applications and either had to grow or start rejecting people we thought were good. I never considered what I'd do if someone wanted to b…

I think those are the exact arguments Steve used about Apple (and Mark about Facebook). It was an interesting project; didn't plan it; it took over his life; other people would ruin it; the money was't an important factor.

Interesting. Thanks.

Post reply on HN