But what if the failure rate for those who do try is 99%? Trying isn't always zero-risk... I wonder if ambition could be subject to a cost/benefit analysis, haha. At some point I suppose you just have to let go of the numbers.
1. Extraordinary, and able to achieve what others cannot.
2. Lucky, and by chance successful in an area where success is hard to find.
3. Being told that you have no chance of accomplishing things that are actually not very hard.
4. A living example of how anybody can do that which they set their mind to.
If you're 1, then other people can't use your experience as a guideline. If you're 2, then people can't use your experience as a guideline. If you're 3, then people can't use your experience as a guideline.
If you think you're 4, then you're either 1, 2, or 3, and just don't realize it yet.
Well first you are correct in that there is a psychological cost of failure for sure. Which is why it's harder for some people to cold call than others.
I've found that since the advent of email (and before that postal mail) it's much easier though. You fire off an email and you forget it. If something happens it happens. So you don't really feel the rejection.
By the way separately some of the best cold calling salesman are people who can't register or feel the annoyance or discomfort of those they are pitching. People who are able to feel this (either visually or by vocal tone) have a much much harder time overcoming the negative feedback. (Source: This is based on anecdote and observation over many years in business.)
> ...there is a psychological cost of failure for sure.
I think this is one of the biggest challenges for entrepreneurs. Winston Churchill once said "Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." A lot of people, however, can only tolerate so much failure. At some point, failure wears them down and they lose the will to keep trying.
I don't really understand how we've ended up at this line of argument. There is no significant risk to talking shit at a bar. Other than the fact that being in the bar in the first place is generally a good way to avoid opportunities.
There are plenty of places where a person can BS the whole day, build gangs, do no productive work for years and yet take away a fat salary, get travel opportunities, big bonus and manage to get routinely promoted.
Its called politics, and luck.
Such people win more often than the hard working ones.
The question is should you be trying this in the first place?
Did you know its actually more likely you will survive a plane crash than have a successful startup exit? Now, would you still hop in a plane you know its going to crash?
With that logic you should, chances are you will survive, maybe.
The question is should you be trying this in the first place?
Here's how I'd approach this scenario:
Did you know its actually more likely you will survive a plane crash than have a successful startup exit?
First, I'm not actually convinced that this is true at all, but let's go with it for the sake of argument...
Now, would you still hop in a plane you know its going to crash?
Since we're working with analogies here, I'll say "yes". Why? Because continuing to work a routine, corporate 9-5 job, is such a mind-numbing, soul-sucking, draining life of desperation, that - by analogy - it's about equivalent to "remaining in the burning building, on the 99th floor, surrounded by flames, falling beams, and smoke" versus "get on the airplane that might rescue you, but will probably just crash".
So, get on the airplane (or start the startup) and at least have a chance at living, or keep the corporate job (stay in the burning building) and consciously choose death.
Of course this is all somewhat subjective. Not everybody will agree that the soul-sucking corporate bureaucratic world is analogous to death. But for some people, with certain personality types, biases, whatever, it is.
