
The "Me, Too" Startup Syndrome - designhacker
http://funtrepreneur.tumblr.com/post/22201264260/the-me-too-startup-syndrome
======
AVTizzle
There's a subtle, rather meta feeling I can't shake when I read "cautionary"
blog posts like these. It's the feeling that maybe the author isn't writing it
for anyone else's benefit as much as their own. Like the author writes to
reinforce that, unlike said "friend" who's making all these cautionary
mistakes, they themselves are in it for all the right reasons.

Every time the author makes a, "he" statement, you can _just_ perceive a
subtle, "but not me." The faintest signal for both the reader, and for
himself. Here's what I read:

\- "I let a long sigh." (Because _I_ know better).

\- "My friend wasn’t someone I’d call 'entrepreneurial'" (...but I am).

\- "He wasn’t doing it because he enjoyed the process of starting and growing
a company." (But I am).

\- "But building a company requires a lot more than writing code." (All things
I'm far more capable of).

\- "He’s lived in Silicon Valley long enough, and that’s what people around
him are doing." (Me? I'm an island).

Who is the author to make this judgement? Why do you need to fit some mold in
order to participate in the exclusive club, without criticism from the author?
And who gets to determine what that mold is?

~~~
nostromo
Anyone who has been through an incubator has probably heard this line:

"Most of your companies will fail. And now that I've said that, you're all
feeling sorry for everyone else in the room."

Honestly, I encourage my friends to take risks and try new things, even if I
have inner doubts about their ability to pull it off. I do so because I think
that trying something really, really hard improves you skill set -- even if
you end up failing.

If a friend said, "I'm going to try and get into the Olympics!" would you tell
them all the ways they're likely to fail? Or would you encourage them to try
and achieve a dream? The key is not understating the risks; be both
encouraging and honest.

~~~
rdl
I have never heard the line "most of your companies will fail" from anyone I
know of in Y Combinator. Mostly because "fail" isn't really well defined --
even a mediocre startup is usually more interesting than a boring job. Even
founding the next Instagram might be a failure for someone who really cares
about medicine or space.

------
AdamFernandez
I don't know if the author was trying to express this particular sentiment,
but I am concerned by a general theme that I have noticed in articles I have
been reading on HN lately.

1\. We are in a bubble, because all these 'useless' startups are getting
funding when they should not be (debatable on many levels).

2\. Too many startups are focusing on areas that are over like 'Social'.

3\. Some people just aren't good enough or cut out for this, so they should
avoid it, and let the ones with a specific set of 'opinions' create startups.

My advise to anyone also sensing this theme and turning away from creating a
startup is this:

Do it for whatever reason you want!

If you want to make a great product, and love hacking, awesome! Go for it!

If you want to get rich and jump in, awesome! Go for it!

There are no guarantees in life about whether anyone will succeed, but there
is also not infinite time to wonder what might have been. Even if 90% of these
ventures fail, there will still be more great products and opportunities for
everyone. Because that crazy 10% wasn't deterred by someone else telling them
what should and shouldn't be. Cautionary tales help to educate, but don't be
discouraged by anyone if you really want to do it.

~~~
tomkin
> Too many startups are focusing on areas that are over like 'Social'.

See, I like to think of a startup as any other brick and mortar business. If
it manages to leap into a world-wide success, nothing wrong with that - but
don't expect it. Have a game plan that focuses on the reality around you. A
startup isn't always a Facebook or Instagram (although they were too, at a
point). It's okay to build an online business and _just_ make $60-120 k/year -
you know, like any other B&M business owner. To me a "startup" is simply
described as a scaleable model that employs technology intelligently with
modern-day principals of delegation, pivoting & management.

I always get confused about _exit strategy_. To some it means _here's what
happens when/if I bail..._. To others it seems to mean _this is where I'll be
a billionaire and..._. Both are bunk to someone who is passionately building a
product or service that they love.

~~~
cube13
>See, I like to think of a startup as any other brick and mortar business. If
it manages to leap into a world-wide success, nothing wrong with that - but
don't expect it. Have a game plan that focuses on the reality around you. A
startup isn't always a Facebook or Instagram (although they were too, at a
point). It's okay to build an online business and just make $60-120 k/year -
you know, like any other B&M business owner. To me a "startup" is simply
described as a scaleable model that employs technology intelligently with
modern-day principals of delegation, pivoting & management.

The problem is that a lot of startups don't seem to have any plan in place to
actually get to the point where they're actually making money on their own.
The B&M store comparison is pretty apt here. You don't start a corner
convenience store in the hopes that 7-Eleven will come up and buy you. You
start the store because there isn't a store there, in the hope that enough
people will come and buy stuff that you can make a profit.

That's where a lot of the worry is, I think. Especially because we're seeing a
huge amount of VC funding going towards startups that are almost purely pinned
on getting snapped up by a bigger company. Instagram is a great example of
this. They have a product that has the majority of the current midshare in
it's space, has millions of users, is a very cool application on both a
technical usability level... and approximately $0 in incoming revenue. And no
plan to make money besides "Maybe get advertisers on the platform at some
point in the future"([http://behindcompanies.com/2012/04/instagrams-business-
model...](http://behindcompanies.com/2012/04/instagrams-business-model/) )[1].
From an investment perspective, it was a very bad investment... until they
sold out to Facebook, at which point it was a GREAT one.

I think that's the concern that TFA has. A lot of startups, by and large, have
turned into R&D for large corporations rather than traditional entrepreneurial
businesses. The concern isn't that people are creating a product that's sold.
They're creating a product without any concern about how to make money with
it, and are hoping that someone with deep pockets will snap them up. There's a
time and place for both, but the second shouldn't be getting nearly as much
money as the first.

[1]To be fair, I think that with 30 million users, Instagram would have a
viable business model based on advertising, and certainly could have made a
profit. The problem, though, is that I don't think that model would return
anywhere near the amount that the $500MM valuation indicated. Certainly, it
would be in the low tens of millions of dollars, but not in the hundreds.

~~~
arunmur
I like the view point. Another way of looking at this is what Startups were
always good at. They were always good at "Disruptive Innovation". The regular
"Continuos Innovations" is better done by big companies. Most startups today
dont start with the idea of creating a business but to disruptively solve a
problem. If the goal of the business is to cause Disruptive Innovation then it
can be done better without looking at the money on day to day basis. Big
Companies being able to acquire these Innovative companies works well for all
parties involved.

------
angersock
Regardless of the strengths or weaknesses of this article, the scansion of
his/her opening poetry bothers me.

In the spirit of hacking, I've tried to improve it (and please help me if I've
done this wrong or poorly!):

    
    
        Twas the Y-Comb deadline eve, when all through the valley
        All the hackers were stirring (it's a big night for Cali!).
    
        Scores of applications were POST'ed with care
        In hopes they'd be found by Paul Graham to be fair.
    
        And many a partner slumbered softly in bed,
        while visions of A-rounds flooded their SO's heads.
    
        Quite out of the blue my iPhone did ring:
        an old friend to a bar for a convo I'd bring!

------
larrys
"- But why do you want to get into YC?

\- Are you kidding? It’s an awesome opportunity: you get to mingle with smart
people, work on something exciting, get funding and mentorship, investors will
chase you to give you money, and you’re much more likely get acquired in the
future.

\- That’s not what I meant. I know YC is a great place. But why do YOU want to
get in?"

"why do YOU want to get in?" The question _was_ answered.

~~~
shantanubala
Definitely. Mingling with smart people, working on something exciting, and
getting mentorship are often _ends in themselves_ and don't need any further
justification.

------
gravitronic
Some advice I try to live by is to ignore others and just do "you".

So, don't worry about whether or not your friend is starting a business for
the right reasons. He'll figure it out.

Your productivity will increase when you focus on your own goals instead of
others.

------
MisterBastahrd
Everytime I read a post like this, all I hear is "please don't compete with
me."

------
xarien
Aside from all of the other possibly insulting remarks from the post, this
particular one caught my eye:

"And a few girlfriends slept alone in their beds While visions of exits danced
in their boyfriends’ heads"

I'm male, but let me tell you that the above statement infuriates me as it
perpetuates the stereotype that women are not entrepreneurs. I'm sure I'm not
the only one who believes that my better half would be wildly more successful
than I would be if she had an inkling to do a startup.

To reiterate, this form of sexism needs to stop.

~~~
dkrich
> I'm male, but let me tell you that the above statement infuriates me as it
> perpetuates the stereotype that women are not entrepreneurs. I'm sure I'm
> not the only one who believes that my better half would be wildly more
> successful than I would be if she had an inkling to do a startup.

Can you spot the irony in this statement?

~~~
xarien
There is no irony because as I stated, "I'm sure I'm not the only one." This
sentence conveys that in "some" not "all" cases women make better
entrepreneurs.

Irony would only exist if I made a sweeping comment about all women being
better as entrepreneurs, which I assure you, I did not make.

~~~
dkrich
Well I don't want to play professor here, but I don't think you understand the
meaning of irony. The fact that you find fault with the implication that women
aren't just as likely as men to pursue startups but then say that your
girlfriend would do much better than yourself at them if "only she had the
inkling to do one" is ironic.

You see, you resent the implication that women don't do startups. Your
girlfriend doesn't do startups and doesn't have the inclination to do them.
You are using her as an example (albeit a poor one) of why that implication is
false.

~~~
xarien
The amount of assumptions you stuffed into the reply is simply mind boggling.

I'll start by dispelling a simple one:

Better half doesn't necessarily equate to girlfriend.

Furthermore, the condescending tone and verbiage used in the reply is nothing
more than inflammatory. I would disservice myself to continue responding past
this point.

~~~
danssig
>Better half doesn't necessarily equate to girlfriend.

The original post was talking about girlfriends, so contextually it sounded
like you meant girlfriend by "better half". You're a terrible spokesman for
ending sexism as you seem to replace one form of ignorance for another
combined with hypersensitivity (having said that, yes the original "joke" was
a lame one).

------
nateberkopec
Minor observation - the last line about YCombinator being "the best place to
start a company" seemed a little weird. As a percentage, how many of the
recent "startup success stories" have been started at YCombinator and how many
haven't?

------
Quizzy
I find nothing wrong with the "Me, Too" Startup Syndrome. I know plenty of
friends who went to medical school because their parents were doctors, or it's
the "Asian thing" to do, and they turned out to be decent doctors. Same for
lawyers, accountants and gardners; a lot of "me too" happening outside of the
startup world. Unlike 30 years ago, many more people want to go into
technology because it's hip to be in a startup - hell, thanks to popular
cinema (The Social Network) and mainstream technology (iOS/Android) geekie
hobbies are now cool. People got mocked for playing with their Timex Sinclair
in the early '80s, whereas today I have to sign up early in order to reserve
my son a spot in the mobile game development bootcamp. Times are a changing,
and the OP sounds like the indie college guy who's resentful that his secret
band is now being followed by everybody.

Other "me too" activities: marriage, children, golf, smoking, religion,
tantric sex... sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't. All a part of
life.

------
jack-r-abbit
I've been thinking the same things lately. Referring to what ever coding
project happens to be filling your spare time as your "start up" seems to be
what all the cool kids are doing these days.

------
RedwoodCity
Even if a startup fails helpfully everyone involved learned some lessons. I
know people who have been founders or have worked in startups that didn't
succeed, in-spite of that have gone on to do a variety of interesting things.

Companies fail for all sorts of reasons that are often well beyond their
control. Being part of such a team is hardly the kiss of death provided you
can explain what you did and what you learned.

You lose 100% of the games you never play. Go into it with your eyes open that
more than likely you won't be the next instagram, but you will develop many
skills can be broadly applied outside of starting a company. With the right
attitude it doesn't matter if you strike it rich, because frequently good
ideas(supersonic air travel, concord ) lose and a lot of seemingly bad ideas
have made people wealthy(pet rocks).

------
wildmXranat
Awesomepreneur in me says you should take that inner voice that makes you
doubt because of public opinion out back and shoot it. Do what you need, to
get the job done in whatever plan and stay focused. Most will fail, some will
last but wounded, few will stick around and all of them will blog about it.
Just focus on getting the job done, even if it's a local-centric social
network for pets with sepia instagram avatars. Well, maybe I went too far, but
keep focused on your own work, not others.

------
aydoubleyou
San Francisco in a nutshell.

------
dm8
Another issue I see is people are not afraid at all due to easy availability
of capital. Although, entrepreneur can be considered as fearless (at least
when it comes to failure). But he/she always lives in fear. Be it competitors,
running out of money, employees quitting, not able to hire, etc. At least, I
live in fear all the time.

------
chpolk
I definitely agree, it is a lot easier to fill out an application than to
rally around an idea and begin creating a great product. I think it's
definitely worth doing some self examination before deciding you are ready to
do a startup and understanding the reality of your situation.

------
pazimzadeh
I mostly agree with you; however, you do realize that your blog is called
"Funtrepreneur," right?

~~~
mjn
If _funtrepreneurship_ doesn't work out, there's always the more time-tested
consulting version, the _funsultant_. Or, when all other options fail, the
default, _funemployment_...

(Yes, these are all actual words people use, though for different things.
Punning on "fun" seems irresistible. With apologies for the self-link, more on
the 2nd one: <http://www.kmjn.org/notes/funsultants_and_gamification.html>)

------
squarecat
Aaaand cue "Sexist!" outcries...

~~~
squarecat
Really??

Doesn't "...And a few girlfriends slept alone in their beds, While visions of
exits danced in their boyfriends’ heads..." operate on the same presumption
that has resulted in a number of others getting their asses handed to them
recently?

~~~
jack-r-abbit
Can't we just be glad that we're no longer looked at as "dorky programmers
that can't even get a mate" and just move on? Why kick the hornet's nest?

~~~
rainbow
Because your 'we' in this case assumes your reader is male. Again.

~~~
jack-r-abbit
Well... I said "mate" for a reason. I didn't assume anything. But not
everything can be written with those generic s/he or his/her notation.
Sometimes... it just looks stupid. Sometimes a gender must be picked... and it
will always be wrong to someone. Why does it have to be an issue all the time?
Why do we have to assume that every time a person writes anything and they
decide that a character is a male then the writer is sexist?

Besides... the poem said "a _few_ girlfriends...". I am quite sure that this
is a very accurate statement. Of the "Thousands of applications" that were
submitted I imagine that enough of them were from men that a few of them had
girlfriends that slept alone that night. Why does it have to be taken to the
extreme and interpreted as "all these women sleeping away as all the men (and
only the men) go off to start companies and get rich"?

~~~
squarecat
I'm going to assume by your naive indifference you are not female, and quite
likely are white, because you exhibit the ignorance of someone who's never
suffered any type of indignity worse than the label of "dorky programmer".

I don't suggest you complain to your non-white, non-male friends about that...

#IngrainedPrejudice #DeathByAThousandCuts
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camel%27s_nose>

~~~
jack-r-abbit
If the OP had written the poem as "a few boyfriends slept alone..." nobody
would have said a thing. If one is acceptable and the other is not... where
lies the sexism now?

And not that it really matters since we aren't supposed to be looking at
race/gender but yes... white & male. And just to round out the trifecta...
from (what probably would have been considered at that time) a working/middle
class family to boot. So maybe the worst indignity I've suffered was that when
it came time to go to college there wasn't anybody looking to help me.
Thankfully my grades were good enough because they don't give many grants and
scholarships to middle class white males. But I'm getting over that the best I
can. I don't complain about it _every_ chance I get anymore.

But let's not get trapped by this silly notion that only white people are
racist and only males are sexist. I've been labeled all sorts of things by all
sorts of people. For instance... someone who doesn't even know me recently
called me an indifferent, ignorant white man. I'm still standing.

~~~
Katelyn
There's an element of sexism in the poem. It's not hateful but it's pretty
overt.

~~~
jack-r-abbit
Would it be possible for you to elaborate on that a bit? Specifically, what
part is an element of sexism and why?

~~~
Patient0
The implicit assumption that it's the boyfriends that would be doing the
startup and the girlfriends that would be sleeping alone in bed - the
implication that _obviously_ it would only be that way around.

~~~
jack-r-abbit
It said "a _few_ girlfriends" for carp sake. A few. Not all. A. FEW. The poem
doesn't even begin to imply that it would only be that way around. The only
thing _obvious_ here is that some people are hell bent on finding injustice
hiding behind every word. I feel sorry for those people. :(

