Monkey-read, monkey-do entrepreneurship
ambershah.com
Monkey-read, monkey-do entrepreneurship
1–10 of 37 posts
Re: Monkey-read, monkey-do entrepreneurship
#2> "A company with $200K per year revenue with a single person and no plans to “exit” would be a failure in YC"
It might not be what YC is after but I don't think it they'd consider it a failure either. Am I wrong?
Re: Monkey-read, monkey-do entrepreneurship
#3> "A company with $200K per year revenue with a single person and no plans to “exit” would be a failure in YC" It might not be what YC is after but I don't think it they'd consider it a failure either. Am I wrong?
yeah, it wouldn't be a YC failure, it would just probably be a company YC wouldn't invest in. why would a single-person 200k/year profit company need YC?
edit: this seems to me like she's confused. YC's preferences on companies that they would like to invest their time and money in doesn't necessarily equal "the best way" for all entrepreneurs under all situations and circumstances.
Re: Monkey-read, monkey-do entrepreneurship
#4> "A company with $200K per year revenue with a single person and no plans to “exit” would be a failure in YC" It might not be what YC is after but I don't think it they'd consider it a failure either. Am I wrong?
yeah, it wouldn't be a YC failure, it would just probably be a company YC wouldn't invest in. why would a single-person 200k/year profit company need YC? edit: this seems to me like she's confused. YC's preferences on companies that they would like to invest their time and money in doesn't necessarily equal "the best way" for all entrepreneurs under all situations and circumstances.
Your last sentence: that's exactly what I took to be the point of her post.
Re: Monkey-read, monkey-do entrepreneurship
#5Earlier quoted context omitted.
yeah, it wouldn't be a YC failure, it would just probably be a company YC wouldn't invest in. why would a single-person 200k/year profit company need YC? edit: this seems to me like she's confused. YC's preferences on companies that they would like to invest their time and money in doesn't necessarily equal "the best way" for all entrepreneurs under all situations and circumstances.
Your last sentence: that's exactly what I took to be the point of her post.
indeed. i suppose i should clarify a bit -- advice given to YC companies and similar companies should be treated as such -- advice for companies on the YC company-like path, not as universal gospel, and i believe he's made that distinction in the past.
Re: Monkey-read, monkey-do entrepreneurship
#6> "A company with $200K per year revenue with a single person and no plans to “exit” would be a failure in YC" It might not be what YC is after but I don't think it they'd consider it a failure either. Am I wrong?
yeah, it wouldn't be a YC failure, it would just probably be a company YC wouldn't invest in. why would a single-person 200k/year profit company need YC? edit: this seems to me like she's confused. YC's preferences on companies that they would like to invest their time and money in doesn't necessarily equal "the best way" for all entrepreneurs under all situations and circumstances.
Yeah but this is such a specific goal for an early stage startup. It's true YC might not be into this, but on the same token they invest more in people than ideas. So if a company evolves into this, will YC insist on an exit strategy, or would they accept a dividend or some other arrangement? Somehow I don't see PG et al bringing down the VC-style hammer down over a $20k investment.
Re: Monkey-read, monkey-do entrepreneurship
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
yeah, it wouldn't be a YC failure, it would just probably be a company YC wouldn't invest in. why would a single-person 200k/year profit company need YC? edit: this seems to me like she's confused. YC's preferences on companies that they would like to invest their time and money in doesn't necessarily equal "the best way" for all entrepreneurs under all situations and circumstances.
Yeah but this is such a specific goal for an early stage startup. It's true YC might not be into this, but on the same token they invest more in people than ideas. So if a company evolves into this, will YC insist on an exit strategy, or would they accept a dividend or some other arrangement? Somehow I don't see PG et al bringing down the VC-style hammer down over a $20k investment.
YC doesn't insist on anything, beyond the initial terms you agree to when you accept YC funding. Which is why there have been a huge variety of company endings (from quietly slinking off back to college, to selling to Google, to returning remaining investor money and shutting down, to turning into a profitable growth company with no short-term exit plans, etc.).
Anyway, the terms they offer don't give them any way to demand anything. They are a common shareholder in the company with 2%-10% of the shares and no seats on the board. They can't steer the boat, they're merely passengers. So, it makes sense for them to choose companies that the most obvious outcome is one that will be profitable for them.
Re: Monkey-read, monkey-do entrepreneurship
#8Her point about thinking for yourself is condescending. She's hardly alone in believing that she's a critical thinker that evaluates advice objectively. Everyone thinks that about themselves. No one thinks they're a monkey.
Regarding the post she's replying to, she didn't provide any evidence that she's succeeded while ignoring the advice of experts.
Her one example (which was 75% of her post) would be more convincing if it didn't seem like she was rationalizing her preexisting view point. She also describes that she has someone who is co-founder in all but name, which weakens the argument further.
I have to admit that I'm uncomfortable with how much of PG's advice I agree with. There are probably a lot of little things I disagree with, but I can't think of any big ones. Between the previous thread and this submission I was hoping to have at least a few nuggets of disagreement to hold on to. Unfortunately that's not the case.
Re: Monkey-read, monkey-do entrepreneurship
#9Her point about thinking for yourself is condescending. She's hardly alone in believing that she's a critical thinker that evaluates advice objectively. Everyone thinks that about themselves. No one thinks they're a monkey. Regarding the post she's replying to, she didn't provide any evidence that she's succeeded while ignoring the advice of experts. Her one example (which was 75% of her post) would be more convincin…
I don't think it's necessary to disagree with a certain amount of someone's work- it's more important to be able to explain exactly why you agree with or don't agree with someone. This is what really prevents you from being the proverbial sheep.
Re: Monkey-read, monkey-do entrepreneurship
#10Her point about thinking for yourself is condescending. She's hardly alone in believing that she's a critical thinker that evaluates advice objectively. Everyone thinks that about themselves. No one thinks they're a monkey. Regarding the post she's replying to, she didn't provide any evidence that she's succeeded while ignoring the advice of experts. Her one example (which was 75% of her post) would be more convincin…
I don't think it's necessary to disagree with a certain amount of someone's work- it's more important to be able to explain exactly why you agree with or don't agree with someone. This is what really prevents you from being the proverbial sheep.
Of course you're right and that is exactly how I feel. The problem is that it's uncomfortable for me to agree so much with someone. It's very rare as well. Even with people whose opinion's I respect as highly as PG's there tends to be a lot to disagree with.