> The second counterintuitive point, this might come as a little bit of a disappointment, but what you need to succeed in a startup is not expertise in startups. That makes this class different from most other classes you take. You take a French class, at the end of it you've learned how to speech French. You do the work, you may not sound exactly like a French person, but pretty close, right? This class can teach you about startups, but that is not what you need to know. What you need to know to succeed in a startup is not expertise in startups, what you need is expertise in your own users.
Mark Zuckerberg did not succeed at Facebook because he was an expert in startups, he succeeded despite being a complete noob at startups; I mean Facebook was first incorporated as a Florida LLC. Even you guys know better than that. He succeeded despite being a complete noob at startups because he understood his users very well. Most of you don't know the mechanics of raising an angel round, right? If you feel bad about that, don't, because I can tell you Mark Zuckerberg probably doesn't know the mechanics of raising an angel round either; if he was even paying attention when Ron Conway wrote him the big check, he probably has forgotten about it by now.
I agree that this talk is useless, even dangerous, unless you are post A series.
Mark Zuckerberg is probably the worst possible example to use about anything startup related other than how to use one's wealthy parents' money and connections (and the connections' money) to start a company.
Edit for further explanation: Zuckerberg's initial capital for Facebook came from his father and his father's friends. He had been tutored privately from a young age, much like Bill Gates was, and he'd already had extensive experience working in founder-like roles by the time he made Facebook. His life is best used an example to demonstrate the immense advantage being born into a life of wealth and privilege confers, not as an example for what (or what not) to do when starting up a company for the typical person. His life is so removed from that that using it as an example is tantamount to uttering gibberish.
Zuckerberg's bio on Wikipedia says that he is the son of a dentist and a psychiatrist. I'm sure there are plenty of Americans with wealthier or more connected families, and none of them have succeeded with their startup the way he has.
I'm sure there are plenty of Americans with wealthier or more connected families
Sure, but only about 5%. The median salary for a dentist and a psychiatrist adds up to $333,000 which is the 95% percentile for household income today. A verrry long way from average.
Zuckerburg is a bad example; Facebook was his 3rd company, and his second (Synapse Media Player) reputedly got a million-dollar buyout offer from Microsoft. There are many reasons he might've chosen to incorporate as a Florida LLC; the likely one is that past experience with startups told him it wasn't important and could be fixed later, so he chose the simplest option.
Your overall point stands - Google or E-bay would be much better examples, as they really were started by first-time founders.
The lectures are from a good sampling
of the most successful start-up people
in Silicon Valley.
So, for any of the lectures, if not all the
content seems earth shaking, Nobel prize level
stuff, then just accept the good news: It's possible
to be one of the most successful at the level
of content often in the lectures! Comforting!
They definitely send a signal that success is possible, and even though the advice is (has to be, probably!) quite generic, it's still good to get a distilled overview of what the people who made this journey before us found important in hindsight.
Of course the best overall statement I ever heard from a successful person comes from Notch, who, when asked what advice he would give to someone who wanted to become as successful as him, replied: first of all, don't listen to advice. The deeper wisdom behind this that really hit a chord with me is there is no big secret which successful people can hand down to others so they may reliably replicate that success.
You might learn something, or even a lot, about procedures and attitudes that were essential, but at a fundamental level I don't think a successful person can meaningfully grasp all the factors that were instrumental to their story. A lot of what they think is essential may in fact be superstition, as they lack enough data points.
I found it's still valuable information, but as with anything, you have to weigh it critically. All things being equal, I'd put a lot more weight on advice coming from VCs or people running incubators as compared to the observations of super successful billionaire founders, simply because they have access to more data.
The two big takeaways for me were: 1) The editor analogy for founders and 2) The Ammunition and Barrels metaphor. Looking at yourself as an editor that has to apply 'red ink' to your startup (especially as it grows) makes sense to me intuitively. As for the Ammunition and Barrels, I think this is counter intuitive but true. More manpower doesn't mean more results, unless you have the right type of manpower and process in place.
I'd probably distill most of his lecture down to these two core ideas...as a method of operating you're startup. As a result, I've summarized most of the useful quotes from the lecture here:
https://medium.com/how-to-start-a-startup/56-quotes-from-kei...
I don't know if the last page of the presentation is inspiring... Nowadays, I imagine the CEOs of successful companies more relaxed than the people below them.
We don't have real data about this to compare but I imagine that if your company is doing well you can make it work without stress. That's why you have thousands of employees and billions of dollars to spend. I don't think you are a good CEO if you can't see the stuff at a higher level and not rest well.
I think you might be conflating owner and CEO. Owners often don't have to work every day after the business is running smoothly and they have hired good people to manage it. CEOs have to work every day just like all other employees and they have different types of stress than the typical employee. Sure the CEO probably doesn't have to worry about money or about getting fired (mostly), they still have plenty of stress because their job is to always deal with the worst problem. The problem no one else can handle or wants to handle. Plus they have to worry about the business as a whole and they understand that if they screw up, 10s or 100s or 1000s of people are hurt.
No, I am not saying that the CEO doesn't work and he/she is in the beach all week. Also, it is impossible to generalize but if you build a good team you can focus in very specific issues, the major part are solved by your team.
I am not talking about startups, just about established and successful companies.
I'm reminded of the description of the order
during WWII for the US landing at Leyte Gulf:
"Land and establish a base" or some such.
Just that short. For some hundreds of thousands
of soldiers.
So, for, say, the CTO, maybe "Implement the
server farm."
In other ways he liked some things to be complicated,
e.g., the story of the three page memo
on how the receptionist should answer the phone.
This is my (new) most interesting lecture. There's a psychological side to employee startup culture which is covered in some management classes that I haven't heard about being covered here.
"I hate watching this at lunch time during work hours"
This is a complement on how great I think the series is.
I absolutely love this series of videos. Its supremely comprehensive and makes me just want to quit my job, drive home, and build an amazing company.
Unfortunately bills gets in the way so I have to work these 8 hours. That said, every time I do watch these videos I'm coding and planning on my off hours. Startup school in NYC was an amazing experience as well.
This was fantastic. Does anyone know good resources for building internal dashboards? (I can't help but think of the Business Model Canvas as a proxy example of the style of resource I mean)
In this series there have been a lot of lectures that really resonated with me, while others didn't for various reasons. I don't think you can find out without at least partially watching them.
"Lectures"/"Talk" these do not compute in the real world.
If you know your field then you do not need this.
If you don't it won't make you succeed.
You need a capital, & that's the bottom line!
Without any kind of money which is time you simply can not do a startup.
Now, why people give up money to others? That's the real question.
I confidently can say at least 80% of the time it has nothing to do with the venture itself!
Connections, how you look/sound etc.
If you watch Shark tank you can see this clearly where Sharks bend the "rules" when they like someone.
Money is never an issue for them here, it's why would I give this person my money.
People tend to revert to these things because no one knows the future & unfortunately instead of making decisions rationally they end up going to the other end which is almost like consulting an oracle.
I am doing a Startup & have launched a fundraiser www.9mim.com & will share the process
Please check it out & give me your honest feedback to me this is more important than the $ itself as I'll do it regardless but with the $ it'll happen faster & have a better chance of succeeding.
+1 Grade/compensate based on ratio of output divided by resources, so that managers don't have incentive to create empires.
+1 Calendar audit vs stated priorities
+1 Company must have one voice and a simple message