Age and high-growth entrepreneurship

Re:Age and high-growth entrepreneurship by beckingz on Sunday January 23, 2022 @11:57AM (#30047748)

The mean age at founding a 1 in 1000 fastest growing organization is 45.

Which makes sense, because industry connections for talent and sales are incredibly valuable.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Age and high-growth entrepreneurship by Toine on Sunday January 23, 2022 @11:59AM (#30047767)

And this : "Prior experience in the specific industry predicts much greater rates of entrepreneurial success"

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Age and high-growth entrepreneurship by jeffreyrogers on Sunday January 23, 2022 @12:08PM (#30047864)

Makes sense that the high profile founders that started companies when young were largely inventing new industries from scratch. I'm actually struggling to think of a case where that's not true. Stripe kind of fits, but that's arguable.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Age and high-growth entrepreneurship by beckingz on Sunday January 23, 2022 @02:22PM (#30049447)

All the examples I can think of didn't actually start a new industry.

They did get in early on a new industry, but they didn't start it even if they ended up defining it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Age and high-growth entrepreneurship by pessimizer on Sunday January 23, 2022 @08:40PM (#30052676)

Facebook and Google were latecomers. Facebook just executed better than Friendster and Myspace, and Google had their link-counting gimmick.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Age and high-growth entrepreneurship by denton-scratch on Monday January 24, 2022 @04:42AM (#30055322)

> Google had their link-counting gimmick

In the early years, Google was a breath of fresh air; their product (search engine) was miles better than the competition, it looked better, and it wasn't encumbered with ads. That was no gimmick. It's sad, what things have come to.

[ Parent | on HN ]