

Age and the entrepreneur, part 1: Some data - terpua
http://blog.pmarca.com/2007/08/age-and-the-ent.html

======
nostrademons
I read an absolutely fascinating paper that suggested a further connection
with crime: <http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/MES/pdf/JRP2003.pdf>. Basically,
the paper's thesis was that males are biologically driven to do extraordinary
things when young in order to impress females. For people who have the
ability, this can take the form of scientific achievement, or
entrepreneurship, or arts or music. For people who don't have the ability to
succeed in "socially acceptable" fields, it usually takes the form of crime.
The age curves themselves look very similar, and they don't see similar
distributions with females.

After a man has children, the odds are significantly lower that he'll
contribute some world-changing discovery. This is not because his ability
level has decreased - Marc's article suggests that quality of work remains
constant. Rather, it's because he has no _reason_ to. He's already reproduced,
and likely found a lifetime mate. His children's genetic legacy is set in
stone. There's no reason for him to expend the extra energy needed to perform
at the top of his game.

Curiously, men that continue to produce at top-of-the-field levels also seem
to have multiple successive wives/lovers. Look at Rudy Giuliani, Richard
Feynman, Albert Einstein, Benjamin Graham, etc. Perhaps they remain geniuses
because they see the reproductive game as not over yet, and hope to continue
to impress younger, more beautiful women.

~~~
pg
I think the reason men do less dramatic stuff after they have kids is not just
that they don't need to impress women anymore. After all, women also get less
done after they have kids. The kids themselves are a big part of the reason
both parents get less done. Maybe the main reason. And not just because they
take up all their parents' time. Once people have kids, they often think of
their kids as the most important thing in the world. And that means whatever
project they were working on before is now at best number 2.

~~~
nostrademons
All true, but the paper included graphs of women's "productivity" over time
too, and the dropoff was nowhere near as severe after peak childbearing years.
If it were just a matter of time spent taken care of kids, you'd expect women
to suffer a larger output decline, as the bulk of childrearing duties falls on
them.

------
epi0Bauqu
This reminds me of "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" by Thomas S. Kuhn
([http://www.amazon.com/Structure-Scientific-Revolutions-
Thoma...](http://www.amazon.com/Structure-Scientific-Revolutions-Thomas-
Kuhn/dp/0226458083/)). Kuhn dissects the idea of the "paradigm shift" in
scientific thinking in the context of classical physics. It is basically
argued that it takes people who aren't indoctrinated with the "old thinking"
to come up with the "new thinking."

In physics, this usually turns out to be people younger than 26, often through
seminal PhD theses. But not always. Sometimes people dabble in secondary
fields at older ages and come up with significant breakthroughs, like Linus
Pauling (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling>).

I'm not sure what I think about this regarding entrepreneurship. It seems that
very successful entrepreneurs are not always coming up with revolutionary
thinking, but instead executing well and paying attention to small details
that make things work where they haven't before. As such, the age
indoctrination barrier may not be as present as it is in physics. But of
course there are the risk and drive barriers--people get settled and less
willing to take risks and go through the arduous process of starting something
new later in life.

------
sbraford
"If you want to increase your success rate, double your rate of failure." \-
Thomas Watson (thought I heard it attributed to Edison as well)

------
iamyoohoo
This is a classic case of making a really simple analysis complicated.

The reason for age was simple - as you grow up there are more dependencies
which demand a share of your time and more responsibilities to live up to -
which is what pulls you down. The age question was not about productivity.
Given equal circumstances and responsibilities, there is no question that this
thesis would hold true - however that is not the case !!

Sorry Marc - this time it was thought through a little tooooo much and the
original reasons that started this debate were largely ignored. I hope you
read this comment.

~~~
run4yourlives
You can't overemphasize the age issue though to the point that business
success becomes a matter of how much you're not distracted by other
commitments.

~~~
portLAN
Hmm... actually you can probably do precisely that.

~~~
run4yourlives
heh, well, you can, but you'd be missing a huge part of the puzzle.

------
mynameishere
I remember a Forbes article on a new small airplane business, featuring
profiles of the 5 founders. The youngest, if I remember correctly, was in his
40s, and he was an accountant. The engineers were all old. There is very, very
little innovation to be had in the airplane business (the US military is,
remember, still flying planes designed in the 70s) and success is dependent
upon age--which brings a tendency to 1) Not make fool mistakes 2) Understand
horrendously complicated, but mature, technology, 3) Have critical contacts,
4) Have personal wealth to risk.

Something like...say...Twitter. What 50-year-old would even consider doing
something like that? And if a kid does it, and botches it, no one gets hurt.
Clearly the trade-offs between enthusiasm and experience are at work.

 _Dr. Simonton points out that the periods of Beethoven's career that had the
most hits also had the most misses_

I can't find that in the article. If by "hits" he means contemporary hits,
perhaps. But Beethoven's late stage was both sparse, and choked with his
greatest works. Compare that to rock music...the rolling stones' past 30 years
can't compare with any 3 consecutive months in the 1960s.

~~~
dpapathanasiou
_There is very, very little innovation to be had in the airplane business_

Have you heard about the Boeing 787
(<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6282820.stm>)?

~~~
mynameishere
For all intents and purposes, that's a 737 with an efficiency tweak. It's like
going from merge sort to quick sort.

Have you heard about the concorde? <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concorde>
(maiden flight: 1969, when the Rolling Stones were peaking.)

~~~
dpapathanasiou
_For all intents and purposes, that's a 737 with an efficiency tweak. It's
like going from merge sort to quick sort._

Is it? It's an all-new design, using a new material for the first time, etc.

I didn't mean to be so blunt in my first reply, but there _are_ tons of
improvements that can be made in that industry, especially if you look at old
problems with new eyes.

~~~
sanj
Bizjets have been using those materials and avionics for years.

If you want to talk about all new designs and brilliance in aerospace, look at
Burt Rutan.

~~~
dpapathanasiou
You're right, there is innovation in that industry.

And the point is: if a generalization about an industry is incorrect, it's not
a good idea to use that as a logical foundation for predicting the age of
entrepreneurs in that industry.

------
nandan
"The odds of a hit versus a miss do not increase over time. The periods of
one's career with the most hits will also have the most misses. So maximizing
quantity -- taking more swings at the bat -- is much higher payoff than trying
to improve one's batting average."

Of all the conclusions, this one threw me off quite a bit. I realize Marc is
going to be following this article up with a part 2, but I d be interested to
see just how a "swing at the bat" is defined in the start-up context. If a
swing is defined as one iteration, then seeing no "systematic developmental
trends" in the "quality ratio" goes very much against the grain. I would argue
that every iteration teaches us something that is quite applicable in the
"general" sense to future iterations (for different products/services and
across markets).

In any case, even if this conclusion is considered in a non-startup context,
its still very bothersome. For example, if a "swing at the bat" is defined as
one complete work, such as a Book or a Musical Piece, why arent there
developmental trends in the quality ratio?

------
dfranke
Conjecture: the fields with late peaks are those where success requires
insightful planning and consideration, whereas the fields with early peaks are
those which require discrete strokes of inspiration. The distinction between
the two skills is similar to PG's description of the distinction between
intelligence and wisdom.

~~~
nostrademons
Another conjecture: fields with late peaks define success in terms of
"convincing people of what they already know", while fields with early peaks
define success in terms of "convincing people that everything they know is
wrong."

I'm thinking in terms of authors vs. physicists: you absolutely _cannot_ write
a novel until you have the life experience needed to write a story that
resonates with readers. However, performing an experiment that resonates with
other physicists isn't a paradigm shift; it's normal science. Valuable, but
not world-changing.

It seems like it applies to many other fields though. CEOs peak in their 60s;
their job consists of internalizing the culture of their organization and
making wise decisions based on that experience. Lawyers peak in their 40s and
50s; their job consists of internalizing court precedents so they can predict
how a judge or jury will rule. Musicians peak in their late 20s and early 30s;
their job consists of internalizing the conventions of existing musical forms
and turning that into something new and fresh. Entrepreneurs peak in their
20s; their job consists of recognizing ideas that others have overlooked and
convincing the world that those are _good_ ideas.

------
terpua
I think it comes down to passion, no matter the age.

~~~
portLAN
Passion is emotional/hormonal and therefore age is a major factor. People do
crazy, irrational things when they're younger, just to entertain their
buddies.

------
nomoresnow_c
How about the premise that younger people are less tied down by "spouse and
kids" and mortgage, etc... I think that younger people have an advantage with
this regard, but then again, those who are more "tied down" may take more time
to analyze a market opportunity because there is more at risk.

------
bootload
Is _"enthusiasm"_ the same as _"determined"_?

