I took the $300k (2013)(boundary.com)
boundary.com
I took the $300k (2013)
http://www.boundary.com/blog/2013/05/i-took-the-300k/
8 comments
Better than the 8k I got as a later hire in a startup. We actually got acquired, which is the biggest part of the battle. I took probably 20k less per year than I should have and ended up with enough equity to buy an early 2000's Honda Civic. You're not going to get rich as an employee.
Same here. We were acquired and surprise! We got to keep our jobs and if we stuck we'd receive enough shares that basically amounted to $30K at market value.
Acquisitions are rare events (given that 92% of the startups fold). And acquisition where employees actually make out enough to recoup their lost wages, even rarer.
Employee beware.
Acquisitions are rare events (given that 92% of the startups fold). And acquisition where employees actually make out enough to recoup their lost wages, even rarer.
Employee beware.
- "Otherwise forget the extra hours, live a balanced life, play with your kids, love your /(boy|girl)friend/ or spouse."
Couldn't agree more. I've done startups and learnt a lot, they got me to where I am today. Now I've found a corporate place that doesn't take away from my personal life. Couldn't be happier.
Couldn't agree more. I've done startups and learnt a lot, they got me to where I am today. Now I've found a corporate place that doesn't take away from my personal life. Couldn't be happier.
"you're not going to get rich by being an employee"
I disagree. If you're looking at every little startup idea, then yes...you probably won't get rich. Also, you won't get as rich as the founders; however, I have plenty of friends in the industry who have made millions (the typical goog, fbook, yada yada). I think a better suggestion is to shake out the idea before jumping on. I've made poor choices money-wise and I've made great choices in the past (very similar to equity investing)...
"Otherwise forget the extra hours"...
I think there's something in between. As a founder, it's a ridiculous amount of hours / extra stress, etc. Or you can work as an employee and give some extra but still realize it's a job and you aren't a founder. You don't have to work 80 - 100 hour weeks simply because you're at a startup. It's a pendulum with being a founder on one end and being a checked out employee at megacorp on the other. You can work tons of hours at a megacorp (mckinsey, etc.) or.. you can work a reasonable number of hours at a startup.
I disagree. If you're looking at every little startup idea, then yes...you probably won't get rich. Also, you won't get as rich as the founders; however, I have plenty of friends in the industry who have made millions (the typical goog, fbook, yada yada). I think a better suggestion is to shake out the idea before jumping on. I've made poor choices money-wise and I've made great choices in the past (very similar to equity investing)...
"Otherwise forget the extra hours"...
I think there's something in between. As a founder, it's a ridiculous amount of hours / extra stress, etc. Or you can work as an employee and give some extra but still realize it's a job and you aren't a founder. You don't have to work 80 - 100 hour weeks simply because you're at a startup. It's a pendulum with being a founder on one end and being a checked out employee at megacorp on the other. You can work tons of hours at a megacorp (mckinsey, etc.) or.. you can work a reasonable number of hours at a startup.
92% of startups fail. For most, it's not going to turn out pretty.
Apparently your friends are incredibly good at choosing startups; they should be VCs.
Apparently your friends are incredibly good at choosing startups; they should be VCs.
"92% of startups fail. For most, it's not going to turn out pretty."
And if you're a founder you have those same odds, no? With more skin in the game, being a founder in those cases is probably even worse, too.
I think all I'm suggesting is in the risk-reward decision, it's more complex and subtle than just go be a founder if you're going to do the startup thing as that's the _only_ way it's worth it.
"Apparently your friends are incredibly good at choosing startups; they should be VCs."
Some of them are; however, some are relatively happy going from startup to startup (fairly early) getting things done. I'm sure some of those will hit well and others won't.
And if you're a founder you have those same odds, no? With more skin in the game, being a founder in those cases is probably even worse, too.
I think all I'm suggesting is in the risk-reward decision, it's more complex and subtle than just go be a founder if you're going to do the startup thing as that's the _only_ way it's worth it.
"Apparently your friends are incredibly good at choosing startups; they should be VCs."
Some of them are; however, some are relatively happy going from startup to startup (fairly early) getting things done. I'm sure some of those will hit well and others won't.
I don't think it is the same odds. The number of startups in which employee 500 gets rich is vanishingly small. The number in which employee 3 gets rich is higher. On the other hand, you'd need 500/3 such startups to counter the first kind. I don't know what the actual numbers are.
I'm sorry. I didn't mean to imply employee 500. Employee #10, for example or even employee #50 could still do substantially well (similar to what you allude to in saying "the number in which employee 3 gets rich is higher")
Out of curiosity, 92% of startups that reach what stage? Seed funding, series A, series B, etc.?
edit:
It's companies that are picked by YC
edit:
It's companies that are picked by YC
I disagree as well.
You can get single digit millions rich (which is "rich" to most of America, though obviously not SV or NYC rich) by being frugal, saving and investing
Most people don't have the discipline though.
You can get single digit millions rich (which is "rich" to most of America, though obviously not SV or NYC rich) by being frugal, saving and investing
Most people don't have the discipline though.
You could become a millionaire this way but why? You have a pile of money and then you still end up dead.
When you live frugally, you're constrained. There's a max to how much you can save. Furthermore, while you're saving, life passes you by. Opportunity costs.
Who wants to go on a dream vacation when they're in their 60's just to have their hips hurt and their spouse in similar shape? How can we have the dream vacation now and have a pile of savings?
It's better to leverage the upside; figure out how do I significantly increase your income right now. Not increase your income on a probably acquisition 2,3,4 years from now, but increase your income right now.
When you live frugally, you're constrained. There's a max to how much you can save. Furthermore, while you're saving, life passes you by. Opportunity costs.
Who wants to go on a dream vacation when they're in their 60's just to have their hips hurt and their spouse in similar shape? How can we have the dream vacation now and have a pile of savings?
It's better to leverage the upside; figure out how do I significantly increase your income right now. Not increase your income on a probably acquisition 2,3,4 years from now, but increase your income right now.
I don't understand the idea of living so frugal that you don't get to enjoy life just so that you have some money left over when you die. Get rich slow doesn't really make much sense when there is a very good chance I will die before I retire.
The average person (American, anyway) has no financial discipline and will spend every dime they make, and then some. If they simply "increase their income" without the fundamental ability to save / invest, they won't get anywhere long term.
BTW, I'm very good at increasing my income. I usually bring home an extra $2K to $3K a month on top of my day job, and am always looking at ways to grow this.
BTW, I'm very good at increasing my income. I usually bring home an extra $2K to $3K a month on top of my day job, and am always looking at ways to grow this.
>they won't get anywhere long term
Where are they trying to go? We all die. And we can't take it with us. At our deaths, any balance left that is greater than zero is an experience that we robbed ourselves of.
Where are they trying to go? We all die. And we can't take it with us. At our deaths, any balance left that is greater than zero is an experience that we robbed ourselves of.
Retirement? Do you want to enjoy your old age, or continue working into your 60's and 70's? Would you rather make working a choice than an obligation? Plan ahead.
Well said.
Not to digress from the point of the blog post, but that is one truly fantastic logo that Boundary has.
I guess I'm in the other camp, I don't like it at all. I had to go back and look for the logo after reading your comment and I couldn't make out what it was supposed to be until I looked at the URL. Even then my brain didn't want to turn it into letters, but was bothered that the gray parts (especially the vertical parts of the 'u' and the 'n') didn't line up.
And of course since the logo is set in CSS it doesn't have alt text so I couldn't hover over it and get the company name.
That said, I am very pleased that the logo is a link back to the main company page and not to the main blog page; it's so irritating to read an article on a company blog, think "hey, I'm interested in what these folks are selling, let's visit their homepage", click on the logo and be redirected to the main page of their blog and not the company's actual web site.
And of course since the logo is set in CSS it doesn't have alt text so I couldn't hover over it and get the company name.
That said, I am very pleased that the logo is a link back to the main company page and not to the main blog page; it's so irritating to read an article on a company blog, think "hey, I'm interested in what these folks are selling, let's visit their homepage", click on the logo and be redirected to the main page of their blog and not the company's actual web site.
I will call your digression and raise with a further digression: there really seems to be an abundance of these cloud metric startups now. It's quiet bewildering to think the trivial python scripts I wrote in '09 to gather server and application stats (tomcat) could've been the basis for one of these. If only I'd had the vision.
> If only I'd had the vision.
And the ability to execute, and the confidence to risk your livelihood.
And the ability to execute, and the confidence to risk your livelihood.
There is still time. I don't like using any of the cloud metric services with a few exceptions, because I don't feel they are getting a large segment of the market that is undervalued: sysadmins. Most of us are on very tight budgets already, and while tools like splunk and boundary are pretty awesome visually and in the ease of use department, as soon as I start getting back the numbers I get sticker shock, especially because I want to monitor much more than seems to be the norm for their target markets.
This is one of the many reasons why I think FOSS with a support model has so much potential in the sysadmin world. Tool is FOSS, so you can use it as much as you want (no 50c per device schemes) and then if you want support or a hosted version that's what is charged for.
No one is really doing this, though there are a handful of non-foss "open-source" projects around that give you free versions with restricted feature-sets.
As a side note, I have been using Argus (http://argus.tcp4me.com/) and ELK stack to good effect.
This is one of the many reasons why I think FOSS with a support model has so much potential in the sysadmin world. Tool is FOSS, so you can use it as much as you want (no 50c per device schemes) and then if you want support or a hosted version that's what is charged for.
No one is really doing this, though there are a handful of non-foss "open-source" projects around that give you free versions with restricted feature-sets.
As a side note, I have been using Argus (http://argus.tcp4me.com/) and ELK stack to good effect.
Having those what-ifs is a sign you're got some good ideas - we'll see the right ones at the right times.
I agree.
I wonder how much the logo played into picking that name.
EDIT: Turns out, not much. Here's the story. http://www.boundary.com/blog/2013/01/the-story-of-the-bounda...
I wonder how much the logo played into picking that name.
EDIT: Turns out, not much. Here's the story. http://www.boundary.com/blog/2013/01/the-story-of-the-bounda...
Exactly what I was thinking.. the blog post wasn't easy to follow but that logo....
[deleted]
Discussed at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5771558.
Posted in light of BMC acquiring Boundary: http://venturebeat.com/2015/08/18/bmc-has-apparently-acquire...
And as someone who also was acquired by BMC, the interesting bit for me was that the acting CEO of Boundary was a guy named Larry Warnock, who had another company that was acquired by BMC, Phurnace, for what I expect is roughly the same amount of money as Boundary was acquired.
Relationships make a big difference with big company M&A.
Relationships make a big difference with big company M&A.
Oh yeah. Startups try to hire me outright all the time for below market salary when I could land in a bracket $250-380k at Google, Twitter, wherever. If they are, I say "I'm flattered but I have other plans." I laugh them out the door if they're not clients. I'd rather build something other people think is great, even if it's not imminently gigabuck-scale, with my own two hands (and whomever else I can rope in with equity and a fun vibe) than build someone else's vision at a discount.
Equal equity among initial founders or it's a nonstarter. Avoid the PHB enterprise single founder chief whom treats everyone as employees to be managed and hoards equity... that sort of shop will get angels and mentors and bleed them dry.
Equal equity among initial founders or it's a nonstarter. Avoid the PHB enterprise single founder chief whom treats everyone as employees to be managed and hoards equity... that sort of shop will get angels and mentors and bleed them dry.
> Equal equity among initial founders or it's a nonstarter.
I'm about to have to make a decision like this and could do with some advice. A friend of mine (3D artist / graphic designer) tells me he knows two people who want an app doing. It turns out they're just starting a new company and the app is going to be the product. They have already sold it to one customer and have others in the pipeline.
I discuss the app with them, set out a specification / timeline / cost that they like. But then they start with: Can you set up our email? (yes). Can you do us a website? (yes). Can you do a webapp that the customers can use in coordination with the app? (yes). Etc. etc.
So I say: look, I can do all this stuff but it's going to be a pain to keep charging all the time and then there's going to be support costs on top. I like that your sales driven and seem pretty intelligent and we've got along pretty well so far. How about instead of or as well as cash we talk equity?
They think about it and get back to me yesterday and say yes, they've had a chat about it and would like to do that. We're going to meet tomorrow to discuss a package they've worked out for me.
So what equity should I negotiate for? They have no technical experience and it seems to me that I will basically be doing everything at least to start with. One of them is sales and the other is going to be managing the business (which I have no experience of, I've never been a "founder" before).
I'm about to have to make a decision like this and could do with some advice. A friend of mine (3D artist / graphic designer) tells me he knows two people who want an app doing. It turns out they're just starting a new company and the app is going to be the product. They have already sold it to one customer and have others in the pipeline.
I discuss the app with them, set out a specification / timeline / cost that they like. But then they start with: Can you set up our email? (yes). Can you do us a website? (yes). Can you do a webapp that the customers can use in coordination with the app? (yes). Etc. etc.
So I say: look, I can do all this stuff but it's going to be a pain to keep charging all the time and then there's going to be support costs on top. I like that your sales driven and seem pretty intelligent and we've got along pretty well so far. How about instead of or as well as cash we talk equity?
They think about it and get back to me yesterday and say yes, they've had a chat about it and would like to do that. We're going to meet tomorrow to discuss a package they've worked out for me.
So what equity should I negotiate for? They have no technical experience and it seems to me that I will basically be doing everything at least to start with. One of them is sales and the other is going to be managing the business (which I have no experience of, I've never been a "founder" before).
Wait, so they're offering you cash (I'm assuming at standard $200/hr consultant's rate), and you instead are asking for a unicorn (shares of something that has a statistically tiny chance of ever generating a good profit)?
That just boggles my mind.
That just boggles my mind.
I completely agree. Regardless of what your rate is, unless you super believe in the product, why are you trading cash for equity?
Well, first off there's my ignorance and fear. I've never consulted before and every time I try and charge a rate for work people just slam the phone down, literally. I've tried £50/hr, £40/hr, and now £20/hr. In my day job I get about £25/hr.
This is in the NW of the UK and not near any major cities.
Secondly, I figure that if the product fails I'm likely not going to get paid anyway, so if I'm going to be taking the risk I should share in any equity reward.
>>> I try and charge a rate for work people just slam the phone down, literally
Good for you. These people aren't the ones who you'd like to work with anyway, very likely to be toxic clients.
>>> I've tried £50/hr, £40/hr, and now £20/hr
By lowering your requerements, you are attracting more slamming-the-phone clients. Stick to at the very least 50/hr (if I remember well, ~400/d is a common rate for contractors in North, e.g. Leeds). Raise it to 75/hr if you are not junior. It will take longer to get a gig, but it will pay off.
>>> This is in the NW of the UK
Damn, I miss Manchester :) sorry for getting carried away :)
>>> I'm likely not going to get paid anyway
Why wouldn't you? You are not a charity organization, you shouldn't be providing free work. You are providing a valuable service, so you should charge the appropriate rates. You don't owe anything to anyone.
Also, if you are willing to work cheap / for free, you will be treated poorly more often than not.
So raise your rates, be patient, don't let others take advantage of you and everything will be alright ;)
Good for you. These people aren't the ones who you'd like to work with anyway, very likely to be toxic clients.
>>> I've tried £50/hr, £40/hr, and now £20/hr
By lowering your requerements, you are attracting more slamming-the-phone clients. Stick to at the very least 50/hr (if I remember well, ~400/d is a common rate for contractors in North, e.g. Leeds). Raise it to 75/hr if you are not junior. It will take longer to get a gig, but it will pay off.
>>> This is in the NW of the UK
Damn, I miss Manchester :) sorry for getting carried away :)
>>> I'm likely not going to get paid anyway
Why wouldn't you? You are not a charity organization, you shouldn't be providing free work. You are providing a valuable service, so you should charge the appropriate rates. You don't owe anything to anyone.
Also, if you are willing to work cheap / for free, you will be treated poorly more often than not.
So raise your rates, be patient, don't let others take advantage of you and everything will be alright ;)
I think the problem is that I have a very limited market due to my location, though? If I demand decent pay for my work I may have no work at all. Supply and demand and all that?
I live in Canada and for the past four years the majority of my clients have been from outside the country!
Get online to industry-related job boards and search for 'remote', 'anywhere', or 'telecommute' opportunities, especially in places where the cost of living is higher than yours.
I would check out Github's job board, AuthenticsJobs.com , and te Smashing !agasine job board. not the most glamorous places but I have found work!
Good luck, and charge your full rate, you are worth full price :)
Get online to industry-related job boards and search for 'remote', 'anywhere', or 'telecommute' opportunities, especially in places where the cost of living is higher than yours.
I would check out Github's job board, AuthenticsJobs.com , and te Smashing !agasine job board. not the most glamorous places but I have found work!
Good luck, and charge your full rate, you are worth full price :)
There's truth in it, but at the same time, we are in one of the most remote work friendly industries. Check out threads by https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=whoishiring and post there too (a while ago posted there, got a decent gig offered in a few days), you should be able to find something :)
I appreciate everyone's comments, but this doesn't help me with what I'm supposed to do tomorrow besides: "get a decent consulting gig."
Tomorrow you go in, and tell them that you want to get paid for the work you've done so far, and you want to get paid now.
If they start with any excuses, you simply get up and leave. Lesson learned (hopefully).
If they agree, you get paid, and then establish your pay rate going forward. I recommend charging a market rate (whatever a good software engineer will charge you in your country for similar type contract work).
Oh, and make sure you have a good looking portfolio (or github account).
So expand your demand market. You can work remotely, or simply travel to the clients. If they're paying you enough, no reason why you can't include travel costs, etc.
I can't really do travel. I work from home now and like it because of having a young daughter.
If I wanted to I could take contract work in Manchester and earn twice what I'm on now. But I don't want the 3 hour commute.
So you might say, "well that's your problem right there!" and I accept that. But I was thinking that I might be able to solve the problem I've specified without doing the obvious, "move to Manchester."
If I wanted to I could take contract work in Manchester and earn twice what I'm on now. But I don't want the 3 hour commute.
So you might say, "well that's your problem right there!" and I accept that. But I was thinking that I might be able to solve the problem I've specified without doing the obvious, "move to Manchester."
never* tell the client your per-hour; instead quote based on per hour plus incidentals & quote a lump sum for specific project plus a sheet happens clause.
also never say never
I've heard people argue agressively several times on the "per hour / per project" debate.
try per day, or per week?
Wouldn't the advice then be, "never specify your day/week rate." ?
As someone about to make this decision from outside of SF and with less knowledge about the market there, I'm curious to know what you think an SF "market-level" salary would be. Would you mind elaborating?
I'd think the Google/Facebook/Netflix/etc. numbers is the market salary - it is somewhat known in the Valley that Netflix pays its engineers around $375k, mostly cash, for example.
What goes unsaid though is that there's a lot of silly hoops that have to be jumped through to get that salary at many of these companies (bad interview processes, companies realizing that actually wanted X skills for a position instead of Y, etc.).
It would all depend on your skills though. I once turned down a $350k-400k opportunity myself in the area and ended up taking a significantly less amount in favor of more vacation, flexible hours, and much less stress.
What goes unsaid though is that there's a lot of silly hoops that have to be jumped through to get that salary at many of these companies (bad interview processes, companies realizing that actually wanted X skills for a position instead of Y, etc.).
It would all depend on your skills though. I once turned down a $350k-400k opportunity myself in the area and ended up taking a significantly less amount in favor of more vacation, flexible hours, and much less stress.
Hmm ... I am very skeptical when people report numbers of 350-400K. Apart from Netflix, which claims it pays at the top of the market, I didn't think other companies paid this much in base salary to mid-level tech employees. Glassdoor, etc. suggest the numbers for base salary are closer to 150-170K.
I feel that 350k+ is an exaggeration or perhaps the top 10% of Netflix engineers. Netflix is well known for paying large salaries almost entirely in cash (though I've heard that it's at the expense of an equity package or more fully fleshed out benefits). I'd expect that a mid-level engineer at Netflix would be looking at 200-250k though I don't have a lot of data to back it up.
When I worked at Google (2013) a mid-level engineer was making about 175-200k if you considered publicly traded stock and annual bonuses to be cash equivalent. The numbers grow quickly once you start ascending the ranks to Staff Engineer and beyond but again that's only about 10% of Google's engineers.
When I worked at Google (2013) a mid-level engineer was making about 175-200k if you considered publicly traded stock and annual bonuses to be cash equivalent. The numbers grow quickly once you start ascending the ranks to Staff Engineer and beyond but again that's only about 10% of Google's engineers.
These numbers seem exaggerated or inflated to me as well. I can't find any evidence of these $375k salaries anywhere else online except a reddit post which came from the same username.
Something like $180k base + $100k equity + bonus is more realistic.
[deleted]
Good reading. What I take away from these stories is that... Work or no work, family or no family, one way or another, people who are willing to put the effort to implement an idea into a 'startup', always find a way.
Survivor bias...
For most people, they're not going to die or starve to death if their startup fails. I literally have no money and live in a van right now, but it could be far, far worse so I have no complaints. Hit the reset button and try again.
People all the time even have spouses and families and manage to pull off respectable M&A events.
If someone doesn't try, they have to live with themselves and their regret for not answering the question of "could I have built something other people think is great?"
It's whether a person has the stuffing to schlep hardcore and drag themselves over the finish line.
Life's strategy is pure and simple:
Pick your battles carefully, and never give up.
Anyone whom has the courage and the inclination can and should experiment often to see if they can hit on something viable. Because unlike the lottery, it's possible to make a few bucks with passive revenue apps without much effort.
People all the time even have spouses and families and manage to pull off respectable M&A events.
If someone doesn't try, they have to live with themselves and their regret for not answering the question of "could I have built something other people think is great?"
It's whether a person has the stuffing to schlep hardcore and drag themselves over the finish line.
Life's strategy is pure and simple:
Pick your battles carefully, and never give up.
Anyone whom has the courage and the inclination can and should experiment often to see if they can hit on something viable. Because unlike the lottery, it's possible to make a few bucks with passive revenue apps without much effort.
I've got to agree with survivor bias here. The path to success is littered with failed startups. You're ignoring a lot of data to conclude that most people aren't going to starve if their startup fails. Not everyone can survive living in a van.
Sure, it's survivor bias for people whom aren't willing to put in the schlepping and defer gratification that other people are willing to do. It's not survivor bias for everyone in all circumstances, by proof that I have friends that exited to an enterprise brand everyone knows on Sand Hill Rd. for 8 figures. There is no a 100% formula, but the timing, team dynamic, execution, business model/idea and connections/successes can put one in a far better position than say some enterprise manager wantrepreneur falling in love with their "one great idea."
Honestly, I'm a junior wantrepreneur apprentice too until getting to balancesheet positive at least into the six-seven figure range.
Honestly, I'm a junior wantrepreneur apprentice too until getting to balancesheet positive at least into the six-seven figure range.
Again, survivor bias.
I am not saying your proposal isn't a good strategy. There just isn't a guarantee for success. Even your app claim sounds less convincing if you look at the actual average revenue for apps.
I am not saying your proposal isn't a good strategy. There just isn't a guarantee for success. Even your app claim sounds less convincing if you look at the actual average revenue for apps.
That's reality of uncertainties/risks in life and business. There are no guarantees until the acquiring company's funds transfers clear and the accounting dept transfers it to your estate trust in Bermuda or other passport-for-sale island nation. Publishing a two weekend simple, beautiful iOS app with nice 99designs assets makes it easy for people to buy it. Android apps margins are terrible, the best apps are one-time utility apps which charge more for something because they immediately save the user time and money (unlimited vehicle history VIN lookups, automatically decide what to have for dinner based on preferences and not what I had in the last two months).
Ad supported free OTOH infinite running cool but a little crappy games are great for selling more conversions to better paid apps (CandyCrush). They're also more profitable on Android since users expect mode of "something for nothing" as opposed to the Apple tax. Often with games and other non-one-time-useful and non-business-critical apps, in-app purchase of ad removal, virtual currency buy/offers is the way to go rather than paid. But it depends on the quality expectations of the app too.
Generally, If someone believes they can't, even if they may have the aptitude, they'll never know. That is the greatest regret and waste of talent imaginable. One also has to be clear and honest about one's/others' capabilities/needs in order to not get stuck in wandering in wantrepreneur land.
Finally, startup people are most similar to special forces badasses... able to get sh*t done, figure it out and eventually win.
Ad supported free OTOH infinite running cool but a little crappy games are great for selling more conversions to better paid apps (CandyCrush). They're also more profitable on Android since users expect mode of "something for nothing" as opposed to the Apple tax. Often with games and other non-one-time-useful and non-business-critical apps, in-app purchase of ad removal, virtual currency buy/offers is the way to go rather than paid. But it depends on the quality expectations of the app too.
Generally, If someone believes they can't, even if they may have the aptitude, they'll never know. That is the greatest regret and waste of talent imaginable. One also has to be clear and honest about one's/others' capabilities/needs in order to not get stuck in wandering in wantrepreneur land.
Finally, startup people are most similar to special forces badasses... able to get sh*t done, figure it out and eventually win.
I resent the implicit conclusion that people who choose to focus their efforts on building a safe and stable life for themselves and their families, especially their children, are cowards and people who fail simply aren't trying hard enough.
Your life's strategy is simply one of many, and most who follow it fail anyway.
Your life's strategy is simply one of many, and most who follow it fail anyway.
>For most people, they're not going to die or starve to death if their startup fails.
My wealth is pretty much the value of my home. Any risk to losing that is fairly serious. No, my family won't starve, but losing years of equity/value and being forced to move to a shittier part of town and shittier school system, more crime, etc is a demotivator. This is why you see so many startups being kids directly from college. They have much less to lose and they're still young and energetic and haven't been beaten down by the 9-5 grind yet.
>Pick your battles carefully, and never give up.
Agreed, but now I do smaller and less ambitious side-projects than a big dramatic "We quit our jobs and now work out of a garage" type startup stereotype. Its not nearly as sexy or potentially life changing as "I'm selling a small application that targets $boring_industry and solves $boring_problem, but may be a nice small passive income if things go perfectly."
My wealth is pretty much the value of my home. Any risk to losing that is fairly serious. No, my family won't starve, but losing years of equity/value and being forced to move to a shittier part of town and shittier school system, more crime, etc is a demotivator. This is why you see so many startups being kids directly from college. They have much less to lose and they're still young and energetic and haven't been beaten down by the 9-5 grind yet.
>Pick your battles carefully, and never give up.
Agreed, but now I do smaller and less ambitious side-projects than a big dramatic "We quit our jobs and now work out of a garage" type startup stereotype. Its not nearly as sexy or potentially life changing as "I'm selling a small application that targets $boring_industry and solves $boring_problem, but may be a nice small passive income if things go perfectly."
Agreed. Maybe I didn't make my self clear. I'm saying that we have example of successful startups under any condition imaginable.
I never said it was easy or that *chances are on your side, if this [...] and that [...]. If that was the case everyone would be building Apple-like companies from their garages but we have only one, Apple.
I never said it was easy or that *chances are on your side, if this [...] and that [...]. If that was the case everyone would be building Apple-like companies from their garages but we have only one, Apple.
[deleted]
Tom Preston-Werner is a great developer, probably world class. And he was offered a whopping 300K bonus by a company that earns $220K+ profit per employee annually (with a disproportionate amount of value created by the software engineers).
Lots of opportunity cost, gone. How do we offload this risk to the investors? Demand what you're worth. Take money off the table upfront.
Lesson to the Hacker News readers; you're not going to get rich by being an employee. Start your own company if you want any sort of chance of becoming rich. Otherwise forget the extra hours, live a balanced life, play with your kids, love your /(boy|girl)friend/ or spouse.