Re:The Best Entrepreneurs Are Older, Have Less Ego
by jfoster on Tuesday February 12, 2013 @06:47PM
(#5210364)
Part and parcel in that when you start a venture you expose yourself to decisions that businesses or consumers make to buy or not buy whatever it is that you're selling. So there's a risk that it might not go so well. The VC business model is such that they depend on at least some of their investments paying off. If they measure that age is a factor that affects the likelihood of an investment paying off, should they use it?
I don't have a strong opinion on this. I'm just trying to determine which part people have a problem with. The two objections that I can think of are: 1. Not believing that age could be a factor affecting the likelihood of a venture. 2. Believing that even if age is a factor affecting the likelihood of a venture, VCs shouldn't use it.
Re:The Best Entrepreneurs Are Older, Have Less Ego
by stcredzero on Tuesday February 12, 2013 @07:09PM
(#5210471)
I specifically asked you for your thinking and your experience. Either you didn't catch that, or you're unwilling to answer.
Re:The Best Entrepreneurs Are Older, Have Less Ego
by jfoster on Tuesday February 12, 2013 @09:58PM
(#5211090)
I can't see any reason why age wouldn't be useful information for a VC. As for refusing to use age as a signal on principle, I'm not sure that it helps anyone. At the end of the day that means that time, effort, and money are being invested into companies that VCs could've known would have a lower likelihood of success.
Re:The Best Entrepreneurs Are Older, Have Less Ego
by stcredzero on Tuesday February 12, 2013 @10:02PM
(#5211106)
So you're saying that age can be a contra-indicator of success.
In which sense do you find it, "unfair, but part and parcel?"
Is it not fair in the sense that physical attractiveness and gender is an "unfair" factor when hiring Hooter's wait staff? Or rather, is it "unfair" in the sense of hiring a receptionist or a graphic designer? (Where looks aren't explicitly in the job description, but where exceptional attractiveness could be a potent and favorable signal for the company.) Or is it "unfair" in the sense of it being a factor in hiring a machinist?
Can you explain the "part and parcel" part?