If your post was intended to be about iteration, I didn't get that from it. I read "failure" -- especially since the post linked to the whole sordid affair over fundable.com, which has failed in pretty much every sense of the word -- to imply the demise of the company (and the demoralisation of the founder[s]).
For failing quickly -- and iterating, and hopefully learning from the failures -- there are numerous proverbs from Go [1] (the game, not the neophyte language). I also recall reading a very good essay recently, something along the lines of "fail as quickly as possible", but can't find it now.
So, the advice is already out there, for those that would heed it anyway.
[1]: e.g. http://senseis.xmp.net/?LoseYourFirst50GamesAsQuicklyAsPossi...
I remember reading Founders At Work. One of the points that one of the founders made was "don't try to read too many business books" His point, I think, was that it was really easy to fill your head with lots of great ideas. And executing was more important than all of them.
There was a saying I heard once: work on sales and all your other problems will take care of themselves. It doesn't mean that other things aren't important, just that there are some key metrics for any business.
I've spent a lot of time reading a lot of books (and HN) about startups. I think finally it's all congealed with me -- I got it. Perhaps I am sadly disillusioned, but I don't scratch my head like I used to any more. When I read an article like the one I read today, I don't think "What kind of idiots wouldn't invest in such a cool idea?" Instead I think "Wonder why the community has failed this person such that he expects something much different than what he got?"
I'm done commenting, though. We've probably beaten this horse to death by now :-)
So you do all of them. Odd are you will still fail. That is, odds are that whatever you set out to do will not be successful.
I think perhaps we are playing semantics games. If you start with a good team and pivot repeatedly, always adjusting your business model to find and target the customer, and then never giving up? Then you've done exactly what I recommend -- failing a lot repeatedly (and quickly) You probably can fail a lot better with a good team iterating quickly than you can forming a new team each time, or giving it one 4-year shot every decade or so.
If, on the other hand, you view gaining skills and pieces of knowledge as incremental rather than pivotal factors, and you understand that the odds are naturally against anybody, then it becomes a zen thing, just like sales. Just like sales, you adjust your attitude, you screw down your courage, and you go give it all you've got. Just like sales, success comes from within and not without. Just like sales, you do the best, right thing everyday but you're looking at the long haul for value.
Some folks think successful startups are just luck. They are partially right and partially wrong. Some folks think successful startups are like a science, something you can learn and perform repeatedly. They also are partially right and partially wrong.
The only real answer is that success has to come from inside of you long before it appears on a balance sheet. That you create your own value by acting in accordance with your values. From there success will naturally follow.
If that sounds too mushy I apologize. I just hear people in such pain about how screwed up it all is, and I wish somebody would sit down and explain to them some of this stuff.