Jessica Livingston: What Goes Wrong • Hacker News Board

Re: Jessica Livingston: What Goes Wrong

#71

Post by nadam » Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 9:14 AM UTC

Two of the problems can be easily avoided: 'cofounder disputes' and 'investors' are not problems in case of single-founder bootstrapped startups. :)

One thing I would add to the topic of 'determination': Are we speaking about determination to make a startup successful or determination to try out as many ideas in our life as possible, learn as much as possible and try to make at least one startup successful in our life?

I mean first we have to analyze what we optimize for:

If we optimize for the success of a given startup then it is obvious that the optimal strategy is to never give up on the startup.

If we optimize for the success of a person in his lifetime then it is different. In this case we have to examine all kinds of opportunity costs. Could it be a better strategy to very quickly abandon a startup when it seems that people do not want the product, so that we can start much more startups in our life, to increase the chance of at least one becoming successful?

Re: Jessica Livingston: What Goes Wrong

#72

Post by brc » Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 9:34 AM UTC

faramarz wrote: post #55

Awesome read! Jessica mentions the Codecademy team launched 2 days before Demo Day and managed to signup 200k users. If I remember correctly, they launched on HN through a Show HN thread.. and so on.. What I really want to know is, how many of those initial 200k users stuck around? I was one of them and I have only signed in maybe twice since their launch. So what does that mean? they leveraged the curious users to g…

Really I would think it doesn't matter. With that kind of interest (even if it just of the curiosity kind, rather than the stickiness kind), then it's a definite flag that you're onto something.

So, even if the 200k users never came back, there was clearly something interesting about the concept to get that much attention. And with the right development, the next 200k people can be convinced to stay around.

It's a lot easier to convince 200k people for a second look than it is to find 200k in the first place.

Re: Jessica Livingston: What Goes Wrong

#73

Post by brc » Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 9:37 AM UTC

michaelnovati wrote: post #17

I saw this talk at Startup School. Honestly, as someone working in industry who tried doing a startup during school, there's a huge thing missing. CMD+F for "luck" = 0 results. Luck is a huge factor and sometimes you just need to move on to either something new, or working for a company to fill in the gaps, and trying again soon.

The whole resilience thing is about pushing through all the bad luck that can be expected to come along. So that you're there when the good luck comes through.

Sure, not everyone is going to make it, and the bad luck is going to finish them. But doing a presentation about waiting around for luck to strike would be extremely bad advice.

While there is variation in outcomes, people who have posted consistent results show that luck isn't the major determining factor in long-term success. Luck will change the amplitude, but it's up the skills of the founder to make sure they are always pushing through the bad times to reach the chance to succeed.

Re: Jessica Livingston: What Goes Wrong

#74

Post by johnx123-up » Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 9:38 AM UTC

ericdykstra wrote: post #6

Here's a link to the video version of Jessica Livingston's talk from Startup School: http://startupschool.org/2012/livingston/ It really is great! I encourage everyone on HN to read or watch it if they have not already. As a not-yet founder, it has a lot of interesting advice that I don't think is documented anywhere as concisely and practically as it is here.

Any YouTube version available? (This player doesn't work good for me, keep resetting)

Re: Jessica Livingston: What Goes Wrong

#75

Post by accountoftheday » Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 10:18 AM UTC

nadam wrote: post #71

Two of the problems can be easily avoided: 'cofounder disputes' and 'investors' are not problems in case of single-founder bootstrapped startups. :) One thing I would add to the topic of 'determination': Are we speaking about determination to make a startup successful or determination to try out as many ideas in our life as possible, learn as much as possible and try to make at least one startup successful in our lif…

In terms of outcomes I am convinced that co-founder disputes (been there done that) are still a lesser risk to success than the banal reality of simply losing motivation as a single founder. I am a rather determined person but would I have gone through all the way with my first startup while going experiencing the roller coaster? Almost certainly not.

Another thing to consider: In a dispute you may actually be the wrong one, and even if you end up leaving when you would have been right, your remaining co-founders may lead the company to some success while you retain your vested shares and can recharge for/ start the next thing.

Re: Jessica Livingston: What Goes Wrong

#76

Post by l0stman » Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 10:28 AM UTC

dools wrote: post #65

Arguing anything other than differences in levels of persistent hard work and skill in your particular field has a large mountain of evidence to overcome. The effects of those two are very large, the effects of everything else comparatively small per decades of startup and longitudinal entrepreneurial studies. Nonsense about hustle is exactly that: nonsense. The weight of evidence suggests that, if anything, hustling…

Well, played. For a couple of seconds I was wondering why I had this impression of deja vu then I found this (http://hackerne.ws/item?id=4692794). I burst out laughing.

Re: Jessica Livingston: What Goes Wrong

#77

Post by tobydownton » Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 11:05 AM UTC

Geekette wrote: post #24

michaelnovati wrote: post #17

I saw this talk at Startup School. Honestly, as someone working in industry who tried doing a startup during school, there's a huge thing missing. CMD+F for "luck" = 0 results. Luck is a huge factor and sometimes you just need to move on to either something new, or working for a company to fill in the gaps, and trying again soon.

"Luck" is showing up consistently so that you're present whenever opportunity decides to show up. Thus, you make your luck. And I believe this is where the resilience mentioned in the essay comes in; to ensure you always show up.

One of the most interesting investigations into luck was last year's show The Experiments: The Secret of Luck, by Derren Brown. The entire episode is avaiable on YouTube here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4mN33w5Ftw

I would heartily recommend anyone watch it, it certainly enhanced my own understanding of the concept.

Re: Jessica Livingston: What Goes Wrong

#78

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 1:48 PM UTC

dasil003 wrote: post #60

vacri wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gender differences are across entire populations, but individual variance absolutely swamps them. If you want to fill a single position, you're better off looking at the individual applicant's skills, not their genitals.

If you want to hire anyone probably best not to look at their genitals.

[deleted]

Re: Jessica Livingston: What Goes Wrong

#79

Post by loumf » Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 1:50 PM UTC

If you are interested in a take on this topic that is based on data, check out Noam Wasserman at BoS 2009 (his talk at BoS 2012 was very similar)

http://businessofsoftware.org/2009/05/professor-noam-wasserm...

He has been collecting data on start-ups and then looking at survival lengths and outcomes. He wrote a book on the topic

http://www.amazon.com/Founders-Dilemmas-Anticipating-Foundat...

Re: Jessica Livingston: What Goes Wrong

#80

Post by 1123581321 » Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 3:11 PM UTC

wheels wrote: post #70

1123581321 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She also contributed her financial and legal knowledge to YC. The others were "only" programmers.

The part about the "others" isn't really true. Paul and Robert had founded two companies together and Paul had been the CEO of a medium sized startup and taken it through the acquisition process. Also, at least in the earlier YC batches before there were more folks helping out, Jessica definitely felt like the operations person; like she was the one that actually made things happen.

We are talking about the same thing. I meant operations as part of legal/financial -- the business side of things. As Paul put it in an interview at Mixergy.com, she brought the knowledge required to actually put YCombinator together. I certainly meant no knock on the other partners' experience other than what they claimed to lack themselves.