Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login
Few successful entrepreneurs blog (twitter.com)
187 points by asanwal on Nov 3, 2013 | hide | past | web | favorite | 126 comments

I'm a CEO of a co that's doing well.

This comment resonated with me.

Started blogging a few yrs ago, then dropped it.

1) ain't nobody have time for that.

2) too fraught in general. Supposed to be face of company so can't really say anything interesting in a blog.

3) and that Dalton kid posting the millionth "MBA and startups" article: who gives a fuck, what's the use, hire good people that fit... Don't engage in navel gazing analysis.

ain't nobody got time for that

Few people blog, full stop. Is the proportion smaller among successful entrepreneurs?

There are a few companies and people that stand out immediately: 37signals, Joel Spolsky, Jeff Attwood, Priceonomics and probably a bunch more that I just don't pay attention to.

The last three really come to mind because blogging is pretty important to their companies. A large reason that StackOverflow had a strong audience from day one is that both Spolsky and Attwood had good followings on their blogs.

Not sure if this is an example or counterexamle. Both stopped or slowed on the blogging as Stackoverflow got big/mature.

Keith's comment surprised me. I found at least one counterexample among companies we've funded: Jason Freedman of 42Floors. But there are certainly not many.

If the challenge is to "think of successful entrepreneurs or CEOs who blog", I can think of a bunch off the top of my head:

Leo W. at Buffer - http://blog.bufferapp.com/author/leo

Ryan Carson at Treehouse - http://ryancarson.com/

Jason Fried & DHH - http://37signals.com/svn

Matt Mullenweg - http://ma.tt/

Patio11 - http://www.kalzumeus.com/

Tobi Lütke of Spotify - http://tobi.lutke.com/

Dalton Caldwell of App.net - http://daltoncaldwell.com/

Suhail Doshi of Mixpanel - http://sufficientlyadvanced.net/

Jack Groetzinger of SeatGeek - http://jackg.org/

Eric Koester of Zaarly - http://ekoester.com/

I wouldn't necessarily add Dalton to the category of "Successful" just yet. Although he is a great influencer and a great technologist.

ZING (too true though)

minor edit. Tobi is the founder of Shopify, not Spotify.

Sridhar Vembu of Zoho - http://blogs.zoho.com/author/sridhar

Craig Newmark - http://craigconnects.org/blog

Mark Cuban - http://blogmaverick.com

Tim O'Reilly - http://radar.oreilly.com/tim

Yeah, I'm pretty sure evidence to the contrary is stronger. A little googling tells me C-levels and founders of forbes 100 are often proflic bloggers. Novell, Cisco, Oracle, a lot of founders of big companies in India, and many here in the non-tech sector blog as well.

Insofar as commenting on HN and other similar sites is quite similar to blogging, there's a lot of others here too.

Craig and Mark are owners of companies or sports franchises (or own large amounts of equity in them), but are not CEOs. I'm not aware of the CEO of Craigslist, Jim Buckmaster, blogging. Nor am I aware of 2929 Entertainment's CEO, Todd Wagner (co-owned by Mark), blogging.

Also on some of the other folks listed in sibling comments, like Richard Branson, I'd be very surprised if he were the one posting on the Virgin "blog" under his name. Just as executives and politicians have speechwriters, they also have exec comm and marketing staff to write blog posts.

Just clicking on the last few posts, Cuban didn't blog from March to October.

I can also think of KissMetrics CEO Neil Patel http://quicksprout.com/

Joel Spolsky of StackExchange - http://www.joelonsoftware.com/

A significant number of these people and those mentioned in the sibling comments here are not CEOs (if you seek out their job title carefully) and/or don't have startups.

Let's not forget to add Richard Branson http://www.virgin.com/richard-branson

Tom Preston-Werner - http://tom.preston-werner.com/

Looks like Tom hasn't actually blogged in 2 years though. That's not really very regular...

Adii Pienaar of WooThemes — http://adii.me

Collis Ta'eed of Envato — http://notes.envato.com/author/collis/, http://inside.envato.com

Who's that a smart bear guy? Jason Cohen of WP-engine? He blogs all the time.

Vinicius Vacanti of Yipit - http://viniciusvacanti.com/

Dan Shipper - http://danshipper.com/

There are exceptions to every rule, but I generally agree with Keith's comment. For most successful entrepreneurs, the cost/benefit analysis just doesn't work out. Potential issues range from helping the competition to simply wasting time that would be better spent on the business. Additionally, entrepreneurs often have boards and shareholders that are scrutinizing everything they say. Unless someone has a burning personal desire to blog, there are just too many issues involved for already successful entrepreneurs to want to bother with it.

Those aren't the concerns for me (in-so-far as I'm "successful"). The main problems for me are:

1) time. Running and growing a successful company is an enormous sink of time, energy, mindshare, etc.

2) completeness of thoughts. I don't like to blog about stuff where I don't really know what I'm talking about. That unfortunately is also the most interesting stuff I could blog about at the moment. However, since it's still unfolding and the results of my decisions will take 6+ months or even years to arrive, it's difficult to make a cogent blog post about those decisions. Hindsight is a valuable tool for insight, but I'm still in the middle of all these things.

What about you, pg? Arguably you are the co-founder of a successful company which takes up most of your time, and you blog.

I'm not sure what's the point of this statement. Few successful CEO's blog. Few politicians blog. Few celebrities blog. Few people blog. So what?

He's only "arguably" the co-founder of a successful company? Wow , tough crowd!

PG's blogging is different. It does not inform the competition (much), but is INCREDIBLE outreach.

PG's essays are THE essays to read if you are an excellent entrepreneur - and if you are - and you make the decision to go to an accelerator - which one do you think you want to go to?

More importantly, pg's essays are marketing for YC. Without knowing the man, I would guess this is probably more a happy side-effect than a goal of his writing, but nevertheless the economics are clearly in favour of him writing.

Yes, this is a good point. Agreed fully.

There's a hint of at least two tenuous causative implications there: if you're successful, you ought to think twice before wasting time blogging (ie. blogging by the CEO adds no value to the business). Or the corollary: if you're blogging, chances are you're not yet successful (it's a marker for lack of success). Both are reaching.

Blogging by the CEO (founder) simply means that marketing is (also) done by the CEO. The founders and CEOs who don't blog probably delegate marketing activities to specialists (nothing wrong with that). You delegate when you don't possess the skills to execute. This will probably happen when the founders or CEOs don't possess the technical knowledge or expertise about their own fields.

pg blogs? Or are you thinking of his essays?

Same thing. Blogging used to have a different connotation, but it's lost it, and Graham's site fits squarely into the modern notion.

It seems a little anachronistic as some of his essays predate even the word "blog", and he's been doing largely the same thing for years. If anything the notion of blogging has grown even more topical and ephemeral than ever.

What we now label "blogs" predate the word "blog" by several years. They date back to at least ~1993. A word was added to our language to describe something that already existed.

If using that word to describe examples that came before the word was coined is anachronistic, then surely so must be using modern English to discuss, say, the Roman Empire?

To me, a "blog" is a particular format of online writing, but not all online writing is blogging. You can tell because newspapers often have blogs separate from their other content, drawing a distinction. I think there's a similar distinction between "essays that happen to be posted online" and "blogs".

Interestingly, my own definition of blogging is not tied to a specific medium.

To me, the defining characteristics of the blog are as follows :

A collection of texts which are :

1 - Published incrementally as they are written, and chronologically organized.

2 - Meant to be read by a wide audience

3 - Usually not ran past an editor.

4 - Not necessarily sharing any common theme

5 - Usually all have the same author.

I cooked up this definition after noticing that the EWDs had been more or less Dijkstra's blog, long before the Web.

PG's essays obviously fall under this definition as well.

I don't think PG's blogs are chronologically organized in any meaningful fashion. I also think that your definition is too broad, as it would include any self-published book series or maybe even the Bible.

I originally included "short" as a criterion, but I removed it as subjective. And PG's essays are chronologically organized : the topmost are the most recent.

Again that's so vague as to be meaningless--you have to order them somehow and I don't think having a page that lists them in chronological order makes it a blog. At the very least most blogs show the full content of multiple posts on the same page, or have links to previous and next posts.

I think the defining feature of a blog that's absent from Graham's essays is that blog posts can be intentionally insubstantial, sometimes containing nothing more than a link, possibly with comments. The least substantial essay Paul Graham has written is probably the one where he clarifies that he's not a racist just because he thinks having a thick accent makes it hard to be a CEO. I don't think he would consider posting intentionally insubstantial content to his list of essays.

What? Are you comparing idle blogging emmissions starting with "If you are like me" or "I have always been a huge fan of" or "What I will say has been said already here, there and there but I will repeat it anyway" with pg essays? Are you comparing playdoh "shapes" produced by an army of monkeys monkeying each other with the few and rare carefully carved gemstones we can read under pg's hand? Must be kidding...

There's good blogs and shitty blogs. Good music doesn't transcend music and become something else.

Certainly, but essays predates blogging and cover something else, all essays are not blog posts and all blog posts are not essays.

Depends on if you view a blog as a type of content or a method of organising content (electronically distributed, ordered reverse-chronologically , short enough to be consumed in one sitting).

Ok, I guess at least 5 bloggers felt wounded by my comment, which was a bit leaking.

Edit: but maybe, if one in hundreds will think twice before writing again something like "If you are like me" in their post...

Or several folks thought that your comment added nothing positive to the discussion.

Since pg can't always talk directly with each and every YC funded startup founder, I believe he writes his essays so all of them has a chance to get his message. Those texts are deeply related to his core duties at YC and no, I wouldn't call that "regularly blogging" - not even close.

His essays are way older than YC.

Would pg really consider himself a CEO now? Also, if we're considering pg's essays to be different than blogs, then I generally dislike blogs. Essays are way better.

I do.

(I can't believe the one night I decided to go out with friends, this is the thread that shows up on Twitter--my wheelhouse!)

I built and bootstrapped a tech company from the ground up in the Valley. Sold it in 2007 for 7 figures. Then took my personal blog and grew it into one of the top entrepreneurship blogs online. Now running a funded startup and just completed Techstars Austin.

Now that I think about it, my blogger friends and my tech CEO/CTO friends do run in different crowds. Most of the blogger types end up writing books (Tim Ferriss is an example I think HN'ers would be familiar with.) I turned down a book deal to go back and do another tech company because that's what I love to do.

There is a trend amongst bloggers to start software companies. Clay Collins' LeadPages is a good example; he's a crossover blogger/Internet marketer turned software company CEO. He just closed $5M in funding for LeadPages led by Foundry Group.

There are a few more up-and-comers in the blog world who are crossing over into software, but so far very few have made the leap--I think because the skillset is so different.

Weird to think that I'm rare, but it's an interesting viewpoint to hear from the tech community.

I think the OP means real companies, not startups who blog and don't seem to do much else.

I'm not sure if you're trolling or you genuinely misread my comment--I'll assume the latter.

LeadPages generates real revenue to the tune of >$3M/year and is funded by Foundry Group as well as other angels and VCs. It is a legitimate business.

My company is funded by 500 Startups, Techstars, and a group of angel investors. We have one product on the market that is generating significant revenue, and are launching MarketVibe, our latest product, this month.

I would agree with the general premise of "successful entrepreneurs who blog are outliers."

Neither, actually. The OP is quite clear about what he means, probably more professionally than I put it:


i.e. Not startup bubble companies, companies that actually produce something of value, either for society or in significant returns. "Lead generation" isn't one of those.

I really enjoy Jason Freedman's posts, but I suspect 42Floors and many of the examples given in this comment thread don't meet Keith Rabois' criteria which he mentions in the Twitter exchange.

"change the world, or $1 Billion exit or 10x for series A, B investors and 5x for later."

Not yet, but 42Floors is on track to so far.

I do enjoy reading 42Floors posts that get linked here, and of course SVN by 37Signals.

Keith couldn't make up his mind.

When Hunter mentioned the CEO of LinkedIn blogs, Keith said it doesn't count because they're not a startup.

But by definition, the "unicorn" companies are all more like LI than the average startup.

Maybe the question is "at what point does a company cease to be a startup?" At a $1B valuation? Or a significant liquidity event?

When it has discovered a business model that works at scale.

Key points that as I discussed with Keith became clear we were using different definitions:

What is a blog? I'd content any direct communication with the internet at large is in the intent of "blogging".

Which CEOs should count? I have no idea. But for fun lets say $100M+ valued companies.

Does frequency matter? To Keith it does but I think its beside the point.

Does it have to be written personally by the CEO? I would argue not. Many blogs (Svbtle, Medium, Sequoia's) include editing or content help.


If you use the above criteria many many many CEOs blog. From Steve Jobs' letters explaining why Apple has it's stance on Adobe to Elon Musk's discussions about cars catching on fire. Then there are the by almost any definition bloggers mentioned elsewhere in this thread.

As a general rule, Keith Rabois is correct.

Look at the CEOs of AirBnB, Dropbox, SpaceX, Facebook, Snapchat, etc. when they were really growing or fighting to survive. None of them seem to blog.

There are exceptions.

But to be clear: if you're a CEO doing something big, chances are you don't blog much. If at all.

Just like you don't go to a lot of conferences and become a "conference ho", as one of your better CEOs once wrote.

I would argue blogging is not a big value add to the startup itself or the CEO.

Someone wise once said, Startups = Growth.

Startups should focus on 5%+ weekly organic growth in revenues or user engagement well after Demo Day when it is much, much harder to grow at that rate.

The rest is not important. Including blogging.

Perhaps there should be a timeframe clarification, "few successful entrepreneurs blogged while doing their venture that made them successful." I'd say for many of the successful entrepreneurs, it was only after they were "successful" that the opportunity to productively blog was opened up.

Selection bias?

Blogging is a marketing strategy. It's not always a good one (time expensive, money cheap). It also works a lot better for some people than others.

1 counterexample from 600 companies...

do you think that's because once they get really big (especially if they become publically traded) what they can say gets restricted by the SEC?

Coding Horror?

The whole exchange seems to be @rabois saying "no, that's not a startup. No, that's not what I meant by CEO. No, he doesn't count."

What's his point in making this statement, except to attract attention?

Some people really like writing, or blogging, so they do it anyway, whether is useful or not.

I think the point Keith is making that successful people don't have time to blog, or the blog really doesn't help that much. They prioritize their time to do things that actually matter for their business, rather than being on top of HN or being tweeted 1000 times.

It's not the whole truth. When you have actually "made it", had some successes, you don't need the promotion or visibility that much, but when you're just starting out, basically anything might help.

Being tweeted 1000 times actually matters for a business if they have their own marketing machine ready to squire, convert and activated visitors.

Did I really write ready to squire? Correction: ready to acquire, convert and activate visitors.

Those who don't engage at the top of the funnel won't be able to afford advertising to the bottom of the funnel.

I Can't think of a single founder who blogged high quality original content consistently for more than two years that didn't turn his audience and readership into a successful company.

There is a massive misconception about blogging and content marketing in general that gets ignored by people. Creating content that can't be found anywhere else, content that represents the true voice of the CEO or founder and their vision is top of the funnel marketing that makes advertising and regular marketing MUCH MUCH More effective.

Content is the long game, and builds on itself one reader at a time. Eventually it breaks through and than every piece of content you produce gets massive exposure. Exposure at a much more affordable price than any other strategy that exists in the universe today.

Tomorrows leading companies will be the ones that realize they must become the media company for their niche. They must be the go to place for the best information in their industry.

Startup CEO's that don't blog are missing out on the big picture and should really learn to prioritize the value they can create.

Just look at Moz.com and Hubspot. Two great companies poised for massive growth that built their audience by blogging, one reader at a time.

> I Can't think of a single founder who blogged high quality original content consistently for more than two years that didn't turn his audience and readership into a successful company.

This is statistical nonsense. You are unlikely to be able to think of those founders who don't have successful companies, whether they blogged or not.

In general, we are more aware of founders who blog precisely because they do that. Making a list of blogging founders is pointless unless you have a fair way of listing the non-bloggers.

My claim is no more statistical nonsense than the original tweet that claimed successful ceos don't blog.

My point is simply that blogging is a proven, repeatable strategy for building an audience. An audience that trusts you and is happy to give you their money.

Whereas not-blogging is at best a shaky correlation to successful ceos and their success is just as likely to be despite their not blogging than because they save two hours a week not blogging.

Few people blog. The question is thus, "are bloggers represented proportionally among startup CEOs"?

And no successful VC's blog...oh wait.

Obviously most "people" do not blog regularly. Whether it is CEO's of startups or chefs at top tier restaurants or whatever else you can think of. Does real questions is whether anyone have time for blogging? And the answer for the most part is no.

Yet a few people persist. People laughed at Fred Wilson when he started blogging. VC's mocked him. A decade later, every major VC started blogging and are falling over each other to start their own online entrepreneur magazine.

How is this to turn the question on Keith's head: founder CEO's that blog will in fact be a bigger deal and provide better "cost/benefit" than any other communications channel?

Jason Goldberg of Fab blogs regularly at http://betashop.com/ and is surprisingly open about his company and its progress.

Ilya Grigorik ran an excellent programming blog while running PostRank (and continues to run it after being acquired by Google) http://www.igvita.com/

Jason Fried, 37signals in SVN? I'm not sure that's a good example. It's a bit of an outlier and SVN has components which go to their bottom line (selling books, jobs board.)

Why is this treated like some insight? People who are running big successful companies are too busy to do a lot of stuff, blogging just yet another thing.

I think the primary point is that the successful founders we can think of don't blog regularly. I could think of a few exceptions to this that have been mentioned in other comments (Freedman, Musk, Spolsky, etc). However of the exceptions even fewer blog on a regular basis.

There will always be exceptions to this and I hope people don't read remarks like Keith's as how-to guides. It's only a pattern that fits the mold. Don't think that your time is always too precious to 'share insights & experiences' as Hunter stated. That should have its time and place as well. It's very helpful to outsiders such as myself.

There is no real causation between blog posting and the success of an entrepreneur but there may be a correlation between success entrepreneurs and whether they are likely to blog. At the end of the day, I don't think it matters. The CEO's transparency and image is all depending on what company it is. The CEO of IBM is less likely to blog than the CEO of Airbnb (I don't know if either of them blog, it's just a comparison).

<generalization alert>

Writers tend to be high-ideaphoria people. This should be pretty obvious.

In my experience, many successful businesspeople are not high-ideaphoria people. They may be very smart, talented, etc., but their tendency is toward singular focus, rather than an exploration of the interplay of ideas. So it seems natural they would tend not to write/blog. (And yes, I realize there are many exceptions, James Altucher being my favorite.)

Typical Rabois shock-truthiness but he's really just playing with definitions.

In the resulting argument thread, he just labels as "corporate blog posts" any example of a successful entrepreneur who actually does blog.

What he's probably right about is that when they blog it's mainly about their business. But that's a very different, much more limited and not as shocking claim than "nobody successful blogs".

I understood his point to be that successful CEOs don't have time to blog about how to kick ass, or lessons learned running a company, or the usual self-promoting topics we see so much of here.

Slightly meta, but this is one of the many topics that (1) will continued to be debated and (2) always draw attention. The problem with these statements is a fundamental issue with definitions.

What does successful mean? Raised a million in funding? Sold company for a million?

What is a blog? Is a magazine/newspaper turned digital considered a blog? Does a press release written by someone else count?

What is an entrepreneur considered? Someone who just started a company (less than 1 year)? Someone who's started 40 companies over 30 years?

Probably the most well known entrepreneur blog by what is considered a highly successful entrepreneur, is Richard Branson - http://www.virgin.com/richard-branson - but as far as I can tell he doesn't actually write any of it himself.

You know, when you make an interesting statement like this one, you have to keep quiet and let it sink. Let others debate on it and such. Go on with your day. But if you keep arguing and arguing, it loses all its value.

He should have gone to sleep after that.

Reasons that I did not blog when I ran a company:

1) I'm a poor writer 2) Any insights that I shared would benefit my competitors and would be insignificant for customers

37signals is an outlier because their readers are potential customers

I think points #2 and #3 are the most important thing. Even if are a great writer, if your potential customers aren't going to be reading your blog, the only person you are helping is your competitors. It just doesn't make sense to blog, you are putting your own ego ahead of the success of your company. If writing helps you do your job better, write to a journal.

And if you think little bits of information can't help competitors, I strongly disagree. A little perspective (like where a company is focusing or where growth is coming from or whatever) can go a long way, and when you blog you are just leaking those things to everybody else.

One of the most important roles of a CEO is to tell a good story, so writing is an excellent way to practice that and you don't need to write about things that will benefit your competitors.

> 37signals is an outlier because their readers are potential customers

Your readers are always potential customers.

Yes, as in anyone you meet in the street is a potential costumer. So this is a very weak counter-argument. But there are companies that have more economic value in maintaining a blog than others, YC, 37 signals, and other companies that market directly to people who work in the same business, will benefit more from famous blog posts from their CEOs than B2C companies or B2B companies that develop products for companies in different fields.

It really depends how you see success... "Success is working towards a predetermined goal" Earl Nightingale How much money does a CEO need to make to be deemed successful? For me people like Ryan Carson are successful because he is on a journey and whilst I admit he doesn't blog now as often as he used too, when he does blog it is about the journey he is on. Mark Suster I would deem successful irrelevant of how much money he has and his blog is brilliant and regular and a great read for any entrepreneur. Just my thoughts :)

I thought that was the whole point of Daniel Lyons's Fake Steve Jobs blog: that Jonathan Schwartz being a blogging CEO was counter-pointed by Real Steve Jobs as a non-blogging CEO.

The genius of Steve Jobs was that he only had to send a few words from his iPhone and others would do the blogging for him.

Surely the more important question is, "is the % of successful entrepreneurs who write blogs moving up or down".

If you think back to the 90s before "blogging" was a thing, the number of entrepreneurs who blogged was approximately 0%.

You could probably rewind to 1995 and say something like "Few successful businesses have a website" but would it naturally follow that investing in a website was a waste of time?

I think he's largely correct beyond just VC-backed companies, though he did seem to go back and forth between "personal" blogging and company blogging. On a side note, I found his definition of success to be typical of an investor: If you get them a return, you're successful (oh, and "changing the world" means getting them a return). Pretty boring definition of success.

Elon Musk? Mark Shuttleworth?

Viral B2C startups don't require blogs to grow. If your business requires a blog(it requires sales), it is probably B2B, or B2C with linear growth which takes a while and is likely not done by the CEO but by staff. Thus none of the unicorn models actually require a blogging CEO. A server scaling or coding CEO though would definitely fit the bill.

Jason Cohen a.k.a "asmartbear" blogs regularly and he was the CEO of WPEngine before handing over the reins to a new CEO.

A parallel statement could be said about Wikipedia. I bet if you're a world-class expert at something, probably the last thing you want to do when you get home after a hard days work is log to Wikipedia and edit articles and deal with mods.

Still, Wikipedia manages to maintain a not-bad-for-a-first-try quality level on most science-y topics.

In my view, statements like this are thin air. People shouldn't even bother to comment seriously on them because they lack context.

Until I am 100% sure what Keith means by the words "successful" and "regularly", I can't comment nor I can take anyone else's comment on such a broad statement seriously.

I wish more did, but I suspect there is a good reason they don't. There is liability in what they say. And when dealing with lots of money it's easier to say nothing publicly.

[offtopic] Wow I hate reading twitter threads, I wish there was an easier and better way to see related tweets and connect who is talking to who inline.

just drop the word entrepreneur, and this claim is very plausible

i hate it when a shop owner calls herself CEO, CEO should only be used for very large organizations

yet even if you own a miserably failing business (success is in the eye of the beholder), you can still call yourself entrepreneur, i think keith just overestimate the term entrepreneur

Probably a far greater proportion of successful entrepreneurs blog than bloggers among the general population.

He expressed this on twitter, which can be characterized as a microblog. I'd hazard a guess that fewer people blog and instead address the kinds of comments in shorter form mediums.

This seems like a general trend, and "CEOs and entrepreneurs" are probably just following that general trend.

There's one from Tim Cook on HN right now: http://online.wsj.com/news/article_email/SB10001424052702304...

I would have said "an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal with Tim Cook's byline." Nothing indicates that he wrote it himself (though he may have reviewed it before submission).

While I generally disagree with the sentiment, his observation for the subset he's talking about -- "world changers", e.g. Jack Dorsey, Evan Williams, Zuckerberg, Brian Chesky, Drew Houston, etc -- is correct.

Damn I'd better stop blogging. I want to make sure I'm successful.

I think you got the Cause-Effect process backwards; when you are successful you will be too busy to blog, but to be successful, initially, you need to market yourself and your products through blogs...

I think that may be the joke. Though this is the text, so I'm not sure.

Actually, "successful" isn't a good criteria. Any entrepreneur who is on their way to success, or trying to be successful should be counted.

The lessons on the path to success are many, and they are varied.

I'm not sure if he would qualify on the exact metrics mentioned, but certainly in the general sense: Fred Wilson, http://www.avc.com/

Gary Vaynerchuk (garyvaynerchuk.com) blogs all the time and runs a highly successful, high growth marketing agency. Although, he mostly video blogs which can take less time than writing if you are good.

His business was built on blogging and vlogging, it's at the core of how he makes money and markets his products. Not the best example because, of course he still blogs and vlogs.

Very true. There is an obvious ROI for him. However, he is one of the busiest guys I know and still manages to make it happen. Regardless of incentive, it shows it is possible to manage both a high growth start up and a powerful personal brand.

Agreed. Blogging is a tool of the mediocre. It's like the blind leading the blind. And those who do have a clue are trying to manipulate you to their hidden agenda.

dhh is the first example that comes to my mind.

Interesting point, but I think it's still probably important for early stage startups to blog. It helps get them exposure and increase their luck surface area (http://www.codusoperandi.com/posts/increasing-your-luck-surf...). Things probably change when you get really big though.

Does Alex Turnbull, CEO of Groove count?


Jacob Thomason of RentPost.com - http://jacobt.com/

Recently SEC approved Twitter for disclosing material information. I wonder how many CEOs etc will use it.

You can talk about it. You can do it. If your doing isn't talking, then you aren't doing it.

What's the level of "success" he's talking about?

Millions? Billions? Yacht & Helicopter money?

I wasted 10 minutes reading that entire thread. Probably could have written a blog post in that time.

... Well, but you probably are procrastinating. Writing a blog is a creative effort. And in 10 minutes you only can write a very short or unoriginal blog post...

Joel Gascoine and Leo Widrich from Buffer do. Essential part of their routine and business practice.

Dick Costolo tweets. Close enough.

Mark Cuban, anyone?

Ben Horowitz?

Surprised by the ideas.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact