11–20 of 35 posts
Any chance they break out of the survivorship bias bubble in their discussions? I largely stopped listening to Acquired because of that. I want more stories about startups that failed while doing seemingly the right thing, and fewer about startups that probably got lucky.
For those who still use RSS: https://feeds.captivate.fm/thesocialradars/
Any chance they break out of the survivorship bias bubble in their discussions? I largely stopped listening to Acquired because of that. I want more stories about startups that failed while doing seemingly the right thing, and fewer about startups that probably got lucky.
Any chance they break out of the survivorship bias bubble in their discussions? I largely stopped listening to Acquired because of that. I want more stories about startups that failed while doing seemingly the right thing, and fewer about startups that probably got lucky.
so true - way more to learn from failures than successes
It definitely scared me away from investing in my own game ideas.. not sure if that was a good thing or not
Any chance they break out of the survivorship bias bubble in their discussions? I largely stopped listening to Acquired because of that. I want more stories about startups that failed while doing seemingly the right thing, and fewer about startups that probably got lucky.
so true - way more to learn from failures than successes
I was once told only to take advice from people who succeeded repeatedly at a task. Building a company and succeeding is impressive, but there may be a lot more factors in play than just the actions of the founders. Building several successful companies makes the difference.
Any chance they break out of the survivorship bias bubble in their discussions? I largely stopped listening to Acquired because of that. I want more stories about startups that failed while doing seemingly the right thing, and fewer about startups that probably got lucky.
I often have this feeling when reading "why my startup failed" blog posts (how do they know?!). Which doesn't mean they aren't worth reading!
Any chance they break out of the survivorship bias bubble in their discussions? I largely stopped listening to Acquired because of that. I want more stories about startups that failed while doing seemingly the right thing, and fewer about startups that probably got lucky.
I agree that failures are interesting, but the bias problem doesn't go away. Reasons people give for why they failed are no more reliable than reasons they give for why they succeeded (or anything else, for that matter). We're good story-tellers and bad reason-knowers. I often have this feeling when reading "why my startup failed" blog posts (how do they know?!). Which doesn't mean they aren't worth reading!
And “What did you do right?” is often informative, regardless of overall success.
Any chance they break out of the survivorship bias bubble in their discussions? I largely stopped listening to Acquired because of that. I want more stories about startups that failed while doing seemingly the right thing, and fewer about startups that probably got lucky.
Yes, this!
Success stories are fun and all, but there's not much that can be usefully learned from them. The failures are where the lessons are.
"Make your own mistakes, not someone else's."
Any chance they break out of the survivorship bias bubble in their discussions? I largely stopped listening to Acquired because of that. I want more stories about startups that failed while doing seemingly the right thing, and fewer about startups that probably got lucky.
I agree that failures are interesting, but the bias problem doesn't go away. Reasons people give for why they failed are no more reliable than reasons they give for why they succeeded (or anything else, for that matter). We're good story-tellers and bad reason-knowers. I often have this feeling when reading "why my startup failed" blog posts (how do they know?!). Which doesn't mean they aren't worth reading!
100% true.
That's why when you learn about other ventures, successful or not, what the founders say are the important features aren't really the part that you should pay the most attention to.
Any chance they break out of the survivorship bias bubble in their discussions? I largely stopped listening to Acquired because of that. I want more stories about startups that failed while doing seemingly the right thing, and fewer about startups that probably got lucky.
I agree that failures are interesting, but the bias problem doesn't go away. Reasons people give for why they failed are no more reliable than reasons they give for why they succeeded (or anything else, for that matter). We're good story-tellers and bad reason-knowers. I often have this feeling when reading "why my startup failed" blog posts (how do they know?!). Which doesn't mean they aren't worth reading!