Live data from Hacker News

Entrepreneurship's Dirty Little Secret

kernelmag.com

21–30 of 55 posts

Re: Entrepreneurship's Dirty Little Secret

#21
post #13

Without finishing the article, or knowing anything about the author, I knew that this couldn't be somebody who has ever tried his hand at starting a business. The fact that he repeatedly quotes Eric Ries and Steve Blank makes this article a little hilarious to me as well. I for one am only really interested in hearing stories from actual entrepreneurs who have tried and failed or tried and succeeded. Both are equally…

Both Eric Ries and Steve Blank are actual entrepreneurs who have tried on multiple occasions and have both success and failure in their experience.

Eric Ries founded CatalystRecruiting as an undergrad, worked as an engineer for a few years, and then co-founded and was CTO of IMVU, which had a string of internal failures followed by perseverance and success. His experience there seems to have formed the core of the Lean Startup book.

Straight from Steven Blank's personal bio: "After 21 years in 8 high technology companies, I retired in 1999. I co-founded my last company, E.piphany, in my living room in 1996. My other startups include two semiconductor companies, Zilog and MIPS Computers, a workstation company Convergent Technologies, a consulting stint for a graphics hardware/software spinout Pixar, a supercomputer firm, Ardent, a computer peripheral supplier, SuperMac, a military intelligence systems supplier, ESL and a video game company, Rocket Science Games. Total score: two large craters (Rocket Science and Ardent), one dot.com bubble home run (E.piphany) and several base hits."

Don't write somebody off as an academic just because they've written a book.

Re: Entrepreneurship's Dirty Little Secret

#22
I agree that entrepreneurship is challenging, but I think the tone of this article is bunk.

We should absolutely be brutal and frank in our questioning. That's because the world will be even tougher on their ideas once they start taking action. They need to be ready for that, and they will benefit by thinking things through a bit.

But we should never pour cold water on people's enthusiasm. We should never tell people their idea won't work. We should never butt in to tell them how they should be spending their time.

Enthusiasm is precious, and none of us has a crystal ball. Making mistakes is an important part of life. By all means we should help people avoid dumb mistakes, but only because we want them to be making interesting ones.

Re: Entrepreneurship's Dirty Little Secret

#23

this will be mod'd down but it's the truth. Below I reveal entrepreneurship's REAL dirty little secret. it's that if you're talking to an early founder about helping in any way, shape, or form, you are going to get screwed - the question is for how long, and for how much. is it just going to be your opportunity cost at accepting the wage that you were offered and any other compensation? or are you even going to get p…

Modded down indeed, but for incoherence.

Re: Entrepreneurship's Dirty Little Secret

#24
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No worries, most people don't want to be entrepreneurs.

You said a lot with very few words. There are entrepreneurs and what people think an entrepreneur is. Most people do want to be entrepreneurs except they want to be the second, unrealistic kind. You know, the kind that makes their own hours, works in their pajamas, does a lot of delegating but not much real work, and takes a lot of vacations on Yachts in the Pacific. People want to do that. Everyone wants to do that.…

Yep! The family saying is that the freedom of entrepreneurship is that you can work any 70 hours a week you want.

Re: Entrepreneurship's Dirty Little Secret

#25

this will be mod'd down but it's the truth. Below I reveal entrepreneurship's REAL dirty little secret. it's that if you're talking to an early founder about helping in any way, shape, or form, you are going to get screwed - the question is for how long, and for how much. is it just going to be your opportunity cost at accepting the wage that you were offered and any other compensation? or are you even going to get p…

I'd mod you down not because you did not have something to add to the conversation, not even because you provoked me to do so, but because your comment is so unreadable.

Re: Entrepreneurship's Dirty Little Secret

#26

"we need to push back on the growing belief that they can eschew writing a business plan when they are too busy 'doing'" How many startups change their business model when they realize something is not working? Most? I suppose the only valid thing coming from a business plan is the recognition that you're not hitting your goals, you're running out of runway, and you better adjust course. Other than that, guessing wha…

I think it depends a lot on your kind of business.

For the kind of internet businesses VCs like, business plans were always BS. That's because the pivoting and the hockey-stick growth curves make mush out of them.

But I've watched friends start more normal businesses: 1-10 person service or manufacturing businesses. For them the business plan has been really useful in that it has forced them to think through the details. And in particular, made them work out the math.

That math is useless if you're planning on making the next Google; either you'll be buried in money or you'll be done. But margins on real-world businesses are modest, so it's really worth thinking through whether you can turn a profit.

Re: Entrepreneurship's Dirty Little Secret

#27
"...We’re all failing this generation of entrepreneurs by not being tough on them....we need to stop encouraging entrepreneurship without acknowledging the extremely long odds of success, the numerous downsides..."

I completely agree with the thrust of this article. My only qualm is that the word "entrepreneur" is too broad.

Let's put it this way. Need money? Go downtown and go door-to-door looking to help people. Maybe you can clean their office, or walk their dog, make a website, or cook a hamburger for somebody. But if you have some reasonable amount of skill and are willing to physically go out and meet people and adapt to what you hear, I can guarantee you that you are going to make money. It probably won't be in the way you imagined, but it'll work.

This is the basis of entrepreneurialism: making something people want. Get out there and find what people want. Match your abilities up to that. It's a wonderful thing.

The problem comes when we try to add any qualifiers at all to this. What this author is talking about is internet or technology startups. That's a whole nother can of worms. It's like going downtown and looking for work as an accountant. Yes, it might work, if you are already an accountant and your town has a lot of accounting firms. But the odds suddenly increase a hell of a lot.

The problem I see with many recent college grads and many startup fans is the belief that they already know what kind of entrepreneur they are going to be. Once you start qualifying things, you are killing your odds. Business is a conversation, not a soliloquy. We've got a lot of people terribly dedicated to some long-shot, 1-in-50 chance venture. That's not a startup. That's gambling.

But I completely agree that for purposes of this article, we have let a lot of people down. We deserve to give them a much more realistic view of how things work instead of spending so much time on Facebook, Google, and Instagram. We're making this into some kind of perverse lottery, and that's not good for anybody. Just don't use such a broad term as startup and then make some sweeping case that "people just aren't cut out for it" Yes, most people aren't cut out for some specific description of a business venture. But I'd argue that just about anybody can sell apples on the street corner. This isn't an intelligence thing, this is an engagement thing. If anything, you can be too smart for startups.

Re: Entrepreneurship's Dirty Little Secret

#28
post #5

Who's supposed to be the gatekeeper for who should be an entrepreneur and who shouldn't? Doesn't the market already do that anyway?

Yes. But the author makes his living in the market and is sick of having to go through the effort of determining where to invest his money. He'd like a nice gatekeeper to kick all the ones who will fail out so every single investment makes him more money for less effort.

Why doesn't he just give potential investments his test? It is of no consequence to him if the ones who fail continue on and ultimately fail in their business, he will have only invested in those who are guaranteed winners anyway.

Re: Entrepreneurship's Dirty Little Secret

#29
I understand all too well the perils of starting your own company. But I think this article focuses on the wrong reasons why someone should start a business. Entrepreneurs don't think to themselves "gee, I need to be the solution to world's current employment woes."

We just get really excited about an idea, and we run with it. We're passionate about something, and it doesn't matter what the end result is yet. We are compelled by everything in us to do this one thing and see what happens. And it doesn't need to be explained, justified, scale, make business sense, or any of these things... especially not at the beginning. Life is an experiment. We live that through our ideas, projects, and love to put it out there and get feedback, and then just keep going. We want to create things, build things, try something new, tackle interesting problems... Making money is never the primary focus. I understand that this is not necessarily practical, rational, and responsible. But it's the kind of thinking that spawned most great enterprises.

We have to be fearless. We have to ask dumb questions. I can't stand "smart" people that make entrepreneurs feel dumb for asking dumb questions. There are no dumb questions. If that person keeps learning, and pursues what they want, then they'll someday get somewhere. We're optimistic and somewhat blind, and thank God because otherwise we'd never get started and never do anything interesting.

Some of the most successful people have little education, and kinda stumble into their fortune because of some of the reasons above. And this makes those who are smart, educated, and experienced upset because they feel entitled, that they've earned it above those who "don't know what they're doing."

I don't know what I'm doing, and I want to keep it that way. It can be an advantage and lead to new ways of seeing the world. A world that maybe one of my half-baked ideas that I throw together without any plan might someday change.

Re: Entrepreneurship's Dirty Little Secret

#30

"...We’re all failing this generation of entrepreneurs by not being tough on them....we need to stop encouraging entrepreneurship without acknowledging the extremely long odds of success, the numerous downsides..." I completely agree with the thrust of this article. My only qualm is that the word "entrepreneur" is too broad. Let's put it this way. Need money? Go downtown and go door-to-door looking to help people. Ma…

Big +1 from me.

Entrepreneurship is not complicated nor is it necessarily difficult to execute. This article is way too specific on what it is (a technology startup game that requires outside investment for success).

The alternative to entrepreneurship is to work for someone else. When you work for someone else, it's not mentioned enough that your boss is making more money off of you than he's paying you. If you can offer the same service directly to your customer, whether you're selling hot dogs or bottled water or cruise missiles, then you will absolutely make more money and live a more independent lifestyle.

There are far far more entrepreneurs out there making $60k a year than there are entrepreneurs working at startups that will soon become worthless. Those exact same entrepreneurs probably don't have a marketable skill that would make them any more than $30k working for someone else. But the market loves it when you assume some level of risk, and the risk isn't nearly as high as this article or some of the comments in this thread seem to imply.

Post reply on HN