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

Analysis of unicorn startup founders

slimsaas.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 56 posts

Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders

#21

Post by keiferski »

madamelic wrote: post #7

I would be very curious how this landscape changes when you don't consider VC funding as a necessary part of being a startup. I want to see how demographics change due to funding method. Another interesting point, and this is likely outside the scope you are wanting to do, is to do democraphics -> positive personal financial outcome (ie: people who successfully landed it). The past few years has shown it isn't diffic…

You'd probably have far more 40-50 somethings with a couple decades of experience in the industry their startup is in, who raise funding from co-workers/customers/family members/former employers and not institutions. At that point, your 20 years of experience in the field will outweigh any Ivy League degrees.

Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders

#22

Post by codingwagie »

madamelic wrote: post #7

I would be very curious how this landscape changes when you don't consider VC funding as a necessary part of being a startup. I want to see how demographics change due to funding method. Another interesting point, and this is likely outside the scope you are wanting to do, is to do democraphics -> positive personal financial outcome (ie: people who successfully landed it). The past few years has shown it isn't diffic…

The bet is that if they fund 20 Harvard grads, one of them might be like Gates. Even if the rest are duds. The math still kind of works out, they need an outlier.

Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders

#23

Post by borski »

ertgbnm wrote: post #19
flownoon2 wrote: post #5

> Unlimited self-belief > History of feeling like an imposter How is this not contradictory?

I don't see a contradiction. Self belief means you believe that you can accomplish what you set out to so are willing to bet on yourself and take risks. Feeling like an imposter is a motivational drive from the other end of the spectrum pushing you to continuously improve, holding yourself to a progressively higher standards, and never resting on your laurels.

> Feeling like an imposter is a motivational drive from the other end of the spectrum pushing you to continuously improve, holding yourself to a progressively higher standards, and never resting on your laurels.

And also making you depressed. It’s something real to look out for.

Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders

#24

Post by borski »

sakjur wrote: post #9
api wrote: post #4

Well I got the impostor syndrome thing down 100%. The top university factor is probably bias. I mean those schools are good and lots of good people come from them, but people from those schools are also more likely to get funding and other things like top tier employees and co-founders. That's going to create an outsized effect. Solo founders being older makes a lot of sense because to be successful as a solo founder…

> people from those schools are also more likely to get funding and other things like top tier employees and co-founders You are also likely to come from a family with stable finances, and might be able to afford not working on something tied to a direct income for a while.

That may be true for Stanford and Harvard (I don’t know), but a wild majority of MIT students were there on financial aid. There was clearly a spectrum, but overwhelmingly the people at MIT did not seem to be well off.

Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders

#25

Post by p1esk »

keiferski wrote: post #21
madamelic wrote: post #7

I would be very curious how this landscape changes when you don't consider VC funding as a necessary part of being a startup. I want to see how demographics change due to funding method. Another interesting point, and this is likely outside the scope you are wanting to do, is to do democraphics -> positive personal financial outcome (ie: people who successfully landed it). The past few years has shown it isn't diffic…

You'd probably have far more 40-50 somethings with a couple decades of experience in the industry their startup is in, who raise funding from co-workers/customers/family members/former employers and not institutions. At that point, your 20 years of experience in the field will outweigh any Ivy League degrees.

Got data to support your claim?

Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders

#26

Post by lettergram »

> No plan B

That really hits home for me. I decided to start my current company (https://ipcopilot.ai) when I had already been out of work 3 months, I had 4-6 months runway when I left my prior role. Meaning, I had 1-3 months left before I couldn't pay my mortgage when I incorporated my company.

My responsibilities were high: 3 kids, wife due with another baby in 60 days, no source of income, and an estimated 45-60 days of runway. I passed up two mid-six figure jobs to start this business. My wife just said "better make this work", which fair enough haha.

I was able to get 3 funding offers in 45 days & signed the paperwork for funding the day my 4th child was delivered (1 hr after). 48 days after my first VC meeting. Barely able to make my mortgage payment (my co-founder offered to lend me money).

Obviously, didn't tell the VCs how up against the wall I was, but to say it was stressful is an understatement. That said, everything worked out well and business has been doing great. I had to make it work, there literally wasn't another choice. And if this sounds insane, it kind of was, but I saw the opportunity and took it. I'm also sure I would have figured it out if things didn't work out as well, but inexplicably I knew it would work out. Might also play into the: "Unlimited self-belief"... haha

Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders

#27

Post by gwbas1c »

codingwagie wrote: post #14

1. Went to a top school Prestigious people are essentially handed capital. This drives most of the funding at the very early stage. A random founder with no connections or background needs an MVP product with real traction, and even then may raise on worse terms than a stanford/harvard grad. Raising venture funding can be thought of as a career path. Its not entrepreneurship. VC backed founders are more similar to he…

I wouldn't look at that as a "rich get richer" situation. Spend some time with people who attended different calibers of schools, and you'll see that it's not quite so simple to explain, especially when you spend time listening to different peoples' insights about life, and their self discipline. (The kind of insights and discipline needed to start a successful company with VC money.)

The schools aren't gatekeepers to VC networks.

I wouldn't put too much weight on this article. It's just statistics without interpretation, because it doesn't really explain what makes a successful startup founder.

Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders

#28

Post by keiferski »

p1esk wrote: post #25
keiferski wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd probably have far more 40-50 somethings with a couple decades of experience in the industry their startup is in, who raise funding from co-workers/customers/family members/former employers and not institutions. At that point, your 20 years of experience in the field will outweigh any Ivy League degrees.

Got data to support your claim?

Among the top 0.1% of startups based on growth in their first five years, we find that the founders started their companies, on average, when they were 45 years old. Why might this be? Although there are many other factors that may explain the age advantage in entrepreneurship, we found that work experience plays a critical role. Relative to founders with no relevant experience, those with at least three years of prior work experience in the same narrow industry as their startup were 85% more likely to launch a highly successful startup.

https://hbr.org/2018/07/research-the-average-age-of-a-succes...

Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders

#29

Post by zeroCalories »

sakjur wrote: post #18
zeroCalories wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone from a mid tier state school, I've definitely found that people from elite schools work harder and produce more consistently good work. I think this is just anti-elitism cope.

Do they work harder because they attended elite schools or did they attend elite schools because they worked harder? It’s all multipliers: a bias existing doesn’t mean that there isn’t also a factor that relates to the quality of the education. You’re more likely to attend a top university if you have good contacts, good finances, and good test scoring already — those are also probable significant factors to whether…

I don't disagree. I don't think the quality of education at Harvard is that different from other schools. But the quality of the people that get into these schools is way higher. Yes having a good upbringing makes you more likely to get into a good school, and as a result of your upbringing you're more disciplined, educated, and capable. The good have already been sorted from the bad before they've even been accepted into a a school.

Re: Analysis of unicorn startup founders

#30

Post by didgetmaster »

The title definitely needs to say is "What unicorn startup founders have in common". There are plenty of 'successful' startup founders who never become household names and make billions of dollars.

Bootstrapping a simple startup that eventually generates enough revenue to sustain the founders and perhaps a small team of ICs, is much more common than unicorn companies (they call them unicorns for a reason). Those companies are successful in my book.

Post reply on HN