

Jeff Bussgang: A Lost Generation of Entrepreneurs? - quant
http://www.pehub.com/61944/a-lost-generation-of-entrepreneurs/

======
chime
What is the mark of success? VC funding and IPOs? What about the thousands of
under 30s who have made good products, are living a good life from the
earnings, and aren't seeking to be bought out? I know more than a few under
30s entrepreneurs who don't live in the Valley, have reputable positive
cashflow sites, and spend much of their free time traveling the world and
meeting new people. How is that not success if that is exactly what they
wanted to do? Yet you won't hear about them in lists like these, though they
have had garnered lots of media coverage about their projects.

Success varies person to person. Four billion in the bank and a fully-booked
schedule may be success to one while $240k in savings with absolutely no
obligations may be success to another. This doesn't mean they are not
entrepreneurs. It just means they don't fit the author's/society's definition
of success.

~~~
ojbyrne
Good points. I think including Jack Dorsey in the meaningful success category
suggests the OP was a bit wooly-headed. Unless I missed the news of Twitter's
exit.

------
jacabado
Following yesterday's discussion on the software architecs thread.

Doesn't the lack of experience, toughness and soft skills make it really hard
to 20 somethings to have success as founders?

Maybe it's my environment but from what I have seen, I live in a latin
country(one of the least of the latin ones, Portugal), your skills of
comunication are fundamental. And every business initiative needs backstage
moves.

People here will just dismiss you for your age or step on you on the first
flaw.

------
pw0ncakes
I have to disagree with the age fetishization in this article. You hear the
same thing about math and the creative arts, especially in popular depictions:
that a mathematician or artist is "dead" by age 30.

It's not true. Creatives of all stripes (mathematicians, painters, poets,
entrepreneurs) peak between 45 and 55. The ones who peak at 25 are extreme
outliers.

~~~
bitwize
There was a study that indicated the average age for peak scientific
productivity in Nobel Prize winners was 27.

So while not dead at 30, if you haven't completed your magnum opus by then you
are doomed to also-ran status, at least in the hard-intellectual fields.

~~~
ShabbyDoo
Nobel winners must be alive at the time of the prize being awarded. Given the
lag between profound discovery/invention and the widespread recognition of
that profoundness, isn't it likely that those who did their best work at age
55 would be dead by the time their work is recognized? So, are we observing
anything other than selection bias?

~~~
pw0ncakes
Those sorts of awards, in general, are designed to encourage rising greatness
rather than recognize it posthumously. This was the rationale behind giving
Obama the Peace Prize so early in his presidency.

I believe it's a requirement for the Fields Medal that the recipient be under
40.

