When It Comes To Founding Successful Startups, Old Guys Rule
1–10 of 64 posts
Re: When It Comes To Founding Successful Startups, Old Guys Rule
#2From Canada's profit 100 list:
Avg founder age: 43
62 have started multiple firms
3 firms on avg.
Avg workweek 58 hours
Graduate degrees 27
Sole founders 37
Co-founders 48
Female 6
Avg 5-yr growth rate: 2506%
Re: When It Comes To Founding Successful Startups, Old Guys Rule
#3From Canada's profit 100 list: Avg founder age: 43 62 have started multiple firms 3 firms on avg. Avg workweek 58 hours Graduate degrees 27 Sole founders 37 Co-founders 48 Female 6 Avg 5-yr growth rate: 2506%
If most have started multiple firms, then they didn't start being entrepreneur at 43. So is it age, or simply repeated experiences that really matter?
Re: When It Comes To Founding Successful Startups, Old Guys Rule
#4my first thought: no shit?
why do you think serial entrepreneurs find it so much easier to raise money?
PG wrote an essay on it, and the startup learning paradox. You're likely to fail when you're young because you're inexperienced, but the only way to get experience is to start up.
Re: When It Comes To Founding Successful Startups, Old Guys Rule
#5Word to the wise. Discount the old guys at your own peril.
Discount anyone at your own peril. These days, things are often not as they appear.
Re: When It Comes To Founding Successful Startups, Old Guys Rule
#6From Canada's profit 100 list: Avg founder age: 43 62 have started multiple firms 3 firms on avg. Avg workweek 58 hours Graduate degrees 27 Sole founders 37 Co-founders 48 Female 6 Avg 5-yr growth rate: 2506%
If most have started multiple firms, then they didn't start being entrepreneur at 43. So is it age, or simply repeated experiences that really matter?
One is a prerequisite for the other.
Re: When It Comes To Founding Successful Startups, Old Guys Rule
#7my first thought: no shit? why do you think serial entrepreneurs find it so much easier to raise money? PG wrote an essay on it, and the startup learning paradox. You're likely to fail when you're young because you're inexperienced, but the only way to get experience is to start up.
You have to keep in mind the audience Techcrunch is appealing to: a lot of these rockstars probably really think wisdom comes with intelligence instead of the years.
What I'm wondering about, though, is the rest of these younger entrepreneurs: I understand that the older entrepreneurs of course make better decisions, but I wonder how much of these younger entrepreneurs (wrongfully) think they are just as capable, and thus something like Dunning-Kruger was taking effect.
I try to reflect this on myself, 26 years old and founder of a startup, and I am fully aware of my inexperience. I personally attempt to compensate that problem by gathering more experienced people around me, but in the end, there is only so much you can do about it. I do think, however, that knowing you don't know everything at least allows you to be more aware when you're likely to make a mistake.
Re: When It Comes To Founding Successful Startups, Old Guys Rule
#8I have a theory why successful 'old' guys come as such a surprise. It is because a 'young founder' is largely a product of propaganda. Young guys are mercilessly exploited by VC crowd. Venture Capitalists and startup-buying companies like Google (should I also add incubators like YC?) need to maintain 'young is good' thesis to attract the supply of fresh cannon fodder.
The truth is that a VC sits on a portfolio of undervalued options. A success among pool of startups is always a non-linear event. It is a meteoric rise, a market-share grab which often actually creates a completely new market. A very few successful startups will make a large pool of dog investments still a very profitable business. One option will fire, the rest will expire worthless.
That's why a VC has to drive all of his startups towards increasing risk and trying to grow big, fast. Go for a large team. Invest, borrow, rise capital. One of you will win, the rist... what do I care?
Now, from the point of view of entrepreneurs, they often get a very poor deal. An engineer has only one option in his portfolio -- that is his venture. Its success is largely dependent on random factors like stumbling on a network effect, or tapping a new undiscovered need of millions. What would be a true price of such an option?
Whatever the price, young guys have poor bargaining power at the negotiating table facing seasoned VCs. Older guys do better. For a young guy a startup is not only a way to riches -- it is also a way to self-actualise, to define one's identify. An old guy does not need this crap. He has accomplishment behind his belt. He can drive a hard bargain and to get better deal from a VC. He is driven to get a good business deal, and will not go dancing across the room just because his name features in some crappy termsheet.
An old hand is also more likely to take less risk and to shoot for a long term, VC appetite be damned. They will be practicing more 37signals-like approach. Profitable? Have positive cashflow? Great! And fuck your IPO plans, at least until I feel the time is right.
So, it is no wonder that older founders have better success rates. They exploit the VC industry when they want to, not the other way around.
Re: When It Comes To Founding Successful Startups, Old Guys Rule
#9"..showed that the average founder of a high-growth company launched his venture at age 40."
Have not read the paper but this sounds like survivor-ship bias. The number you'd want is what percentage of old guy companies succeed.
Re: When It Comes To Founding Successful Startups, Old Guys Rule
#10I think this article is misleading.
See Figure 1 on page 8 -- only 30.4% of the entrepreneurs surveyed were in software or hardware start ups, the rest were in other 'high technology' industries such as energy and bio-tech. I would love to see the same questions asked of only web-software start up entrepreneurs, I bet the results (age, experience, etc.) would skew differently.