Entrepreneurshit

I absolutely agree with you -- the fact that he's a VC has a lot of bearing on what he writes. Ditto for many of the other people whose posts often end up on the front page of HN. Which goes largely without remark!

And you summarized my approach pretty well -- that it's a lot better to have $500k/yr nice and steady and 'easy' than a tiny sliver of the tiniest chance at a $10-100M payout.

There's just one thing which you missed about that: in most cases, a Liquidity Event doesn't lead to $500k/yr for more than a few years, much less freedom, because of lock-in, and dilution, and taxation. A $100m sale is vanishingly unlikely, and most importantly, to get there you will have to have taken on lots of funding, so it's not like that's your $100m sale.

Then what? You have to start over again.

What I really promote is also an investment model, an self-investment in yourself instead of hoping to receive investment from someone else. Assets are the gift that keep on giving. In the long run, most talented people can make far more from my kind of business than they could from an exit (even assuming they could have a fairly good-sized exit!).

Re: "it should be noted that you have an interest in forwarding this kind of a story as a valuable model of entrepreneurship…"

A lot less financially vested than you might think. My class always sells out, with barely lifting a finger… I don't have to be here to stump for the traditional way of doing business in order to make my living. Emotionally, I'm very vested, because I'm tired of watching people suffer simply because they didn't know there was a viable alternative (because the folks who write about entrepreneurship almost all come from the same exact root stock).

What I really appreciate about your approach is that you are willing to identify and stick to specific dollar amounts. Hell, the name of your course is two numbers multiplied! Nice work, really. In SV entrepreneurship circles, I rarely hear people talk about what specific numbers they have in mind as an outcome, I think because the numbers are so big, so rare and so far away that it sounds silly to discuss them with any sort of specificity.

$6k is nothing unless you have a stable, steady stream of income.

Hey! I just checked out your profile... I ran across your 30x500 site a while back. Looks really cool. Keep up the good work.

After selling my last company, I'm back looking to create another business in the same vein as what you guys teach people to create.

Upvoted.....

I appreciate your perspective on things - it's refreshing.

However, it's important to note that an either/or "our way or their way" mentality limits one's options.

And there seems to be two worldviews (your terminology by the way ;)) - two cultural camps and people in various communities are basically being asked to choose.

"Either you're with us or them!"

Lifestyle business owners have a mental equation where: Wealth = Net (passive) Income

others view it :

Wealth = Net Income + Asset Value.

The greatest asset an entrepreneur will create isn't its income producing products - it's the sum of the whole - the BUSINESS itself (where there's a multiplier affect involved).

By business I mean the system of 7-8 interconnected parts (hat tip to E-Myth) that combined, create the profitable products and services of the company.

Just like learning how to create a software product or a training product is a learned skill - so too is creating a sellable company (a mentor, John Warrillow of Built to Sell speaks quite well on this....only approx. 1 in 100 businesses are sellable http://www.builttosell.com/blog/)

The either/or mentality can be dangerous. Either you're with us (VC funded startups) or you are with "them" (the lifestylers).

There's a happy medium - Jason Cohen is a voice in the wilderness when it comes to this perspective - http://blog.asmartbear.com/rich-vs-king-sold-company.html.

How about more of a push from influencers in the lifestyle tech business community to help entrepreneurs understand the wisdom of building a business they can sell one day?

What about influencers in the VC-funded startup community standing up and saying "wow, making a profit is actually...a good thing!"

Learning to create a company that is profitable makes sense. Learning to create a company that is customer-funded, just makes sense.

Learning how to create a company that attracts investors-as-trusted advisors and that is sellable also makes sense.

Creating a business that sells profitable products is a different skill set from creating a business that one can sell at a profit.

That said, Dixon gets my respect when he said, "the best source of capital is customers. The next best is the founders (cash or forgone salaries), or investors who are less aggressive about returns than VCs. Every startup has its natural source of financing. Venture capital is the natural source of financing for only a small fraction of startups, despite what the press might lead you to believe." http://cdixon.org/2012/07/19/shoehorning-startups-into-the-v...

I suspect there are more people here than you realize who appreciate the value of what a Dale Carnegie, Gary Halbert, Eugene Schwartz or Kennedy (or you!) have to say about "shutting up and letting people pay you" as much as they do about what a Ben Horowitz, Graham or Suster has to say about the funding game.

Reminds me of what one of the most creative business minds of the past 100 years once said (Olgivy) David Ogilvy: We Sell or Else: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Br2KSsaTzUc