[staunch]

> What each of the companies had in common was that they built something that was useful, created a feedback loop of getting user feedback and iterating on the product, and kept at their startups long enough for the market they were in to mature.

> I deeply believe that if three recent college grads (and one dropout) could turn an online reality tv show into a billion dollar company then literally anyone can be successful online.

Not anyone, but far more people than currently are. The only problem is that very few people get the opportunity required.

How many teams get help from YC followed by millions of funding from other investors? How many can spend 5 years working on a project that isn't profitable? As a percentage of people, it's far below 0.1%.

When there's a scalable YC alternative (like equity crowdfunding, maybe) we'll see just how many good technology businesses are possible. It seems nearly unlimited, if you're aiming for Star Trek.

I think there are tens of thousands of 2-10 person teams that are waiting for an opportunity to show us what they have.

[nostrademons]

If it's impossible, it's only because few people have the psychological makeup to delay gratification for years.

The most surefire way to be able to spend 5 years working on a project that isn't profitable is to spend 5 years saving 50% of your salary. How do you save 50% of your income for 5 years? Get a job paying double the median income (~80th percentile [1]) and live like the median person. Or get a job paying at about the 60th percentile ($65K) and live like someone making half that (~30th percentile). Both of them are eminently achievable for many Americans - by the numbers, 20% for the former and 40% for the latter.

Most people don't do this because they feel like they must be better than the people who make half of what they do, and so blow the excess income on a lifestyle that doesn't really make them happier but certainly makes them look better. If you don't give a shit about others thinking that you're a pauper, you can amass a good amount of freedom, power, and yes, money without anyone knowing.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United...

[siberianbear]

And if you keep that up long enough, you can just retire. I retired at the age of 40 by saving about 70% of my take-home salary as a manager of a group of engineers in Silicon Valley.

I will never go back to a cubicle in Silicon Valley. Never.

[staunch]

Some people can pull this off. Most people can't save 50% of their household income. Very few people with families can follow this advice, and that's a lot of good people.

[idlewords]

That's a pretty passive attitude to take. One amazing thing about software projects, for a technical person, is that you don't have to wait around to find someone to give you money to play with.

[staunch]

I was suggesting the reason more people (especially non-technical people like the author) don't have successful startups.

But it's also true that creating something like Twitch is nearly impossible without funding. They could not have bootstrapped it for 5 years because it was/is not profitable, even though it might be a great long-term business.

[idlewords]

There are many more self-sustaining business ideas out there than are being explored today, mostly for cultural reasons.

For every slow-burn success like Twitch there are likely a hundred niche businesses that could earn a modest profit immediately, but are not large enough to interest funding parties or starry-eyed founders.

[graeme]

You don't need funding for all internet projects. I had none, and run a successful online company. Supports me, and I'm free of my time.

Now, not everyone could have done what I did, but it's far more than 0.1% of people.