[Kinnard]

Contrasts starkly with Ron Conway's advice at Startup School: https://youtu.be/qvHhhIfu7Lo?t=4m21s

"Paul Graham: So how can they tell? How can these people, you know it would save them a lot of trouble if you tell could tell them now whether they are going to succeed in starting a startup. How can they tell if they are driven enough?

Ron Conway: Well I mean are you willing to work 24/7. The really great entrepreneurs are 24/7. The word moonlighting is not even in their vocabulary. I mean if they are dating somebody or they are married, they warn their spouse that they are not first in line. That this company dream is first in line and that you have this vocation. It's like being a priest or a nun that your duty is to your company. No, it has to be that fanatical and if you look at all the successful entrepreneurs they are that committed about it. That is a hard commitment, but once you are willing to make that commitment then it solves the work ethic check off. If you have that commitment then your passion is probably infectious. It probably means you can in fact find other people and make them as excited about your idea as you are."

[_sdegutis]

> "I mean if they are dating somebody or they are married, they warn their spouse that they are not first in line. That this company dream is first in line and that you have this vocation."

That advice reminded me of an explanation I once heard about why scam emails intentionally use terrible spelling, grammar and punctuation: it filters out people who wouldn't fall for the scam, and only someone desperate enough to willfully ignore the obvious warning signs will actually go through with it. This seems like the same exact thing. Anyone in their right mind will realize this is not in their best interest, so maybe only people not in their right minds will give 25/8 of their time to things like this, making someone else lots of money through decisions made while overworking themselves "for the sake of the dream" and being pressured into making sleep-deprived judgement calls that benefit other stakeholders more. Or maybe not, I have no idea.

[Kinnard]

Did you watch the video? I think the transcription is automated.

[w0m]

He's talking about the idea not implementation, that something that horrible is at the front as a weeding mechanism.

[CanadaKaz]

This is one of the least helpful things people ever say. A family unit is a unit. Saying I'm putting my company above my marriage is like saying I'm putting my company above my health. This is just terrible; because if you are not healthy you can't run a company. In my case, my wife is as committed to the company as I am. There are days actually when she is more committed. She knows exactly when the stress points are and she knows exactly what is needed. I will come home some times and found that she had a few free hours and has dedicated them to the company.

[chadgeidel]

"... is like saying I'm putting my company above my health."

From parent: "Ron Conway: Well I mean are you willing to work 24/7"

So, yes. That's exactly what they are saying.

[cabaalis]

This is so awful that I'm sad to see the word "advice" being used. I lost my wife due to my commitment to my startup. I'm still at a startup, but the one that I loved and dreamed about so much which cost me so dearly ultimately failed.

Before you take this kind of advice, take a good long look at what you want from life. Before you take a vow to support your business you should remember the vows you've already made.

[JeanMarcS]

18 months ago, I almost lost my wife because of a project I joined at the beginning of 2015 to which I dedicated all my time, hoping it starts rising quick (when I joined they were working on it for already 2 years, and it was "a matter of months, one year top, to finish").

Turns out it didn't, and when my wife pronounced the word "divorce", I dropped it all (the tension was anyway rising between me and the team for some months) to save my marriage.

I was lucky enough that it ended well on my personal life. And that's the last time I make this mistake. Wealth is cool, loved ones are what matters (at least for me).

On a side note, they're still struggling to finish their app.

[ShabbosGoy]

I can second this. I was in a relationship with a highly paying job, and my girlfriend and I mutually agreed to break up because of the volatility that starting a startup entails. Pressuring your significant other to stay with you when the vast majority of startups fail is just selfish and irrational.

[rayiner]

That's a really weird framing ("they warn their spouse that they are not first in line"). Lot's of married people with kids are "24/7." How many Chinese and Indian people come to America and spend 24/7 running a restaurant? Are they single? Or are they married with kids?

[manquer]

There is a strong social expectation to stay married. Many times the marriage itself is arranged by the families. It doesn't occur to some that splitting up is a possibility. Also they usually see it a combined venture of both the spouses.

The social bonds are so strong, I know plenty of marriages where the husband is living abroad usually middle East and comes home literally for few days in a year and the marriages still survive

[watwut]

Pretty much only reason to marry such dude is money. So, expect divorce if things don't go well. Most likely, expect divorce no mater what.

Pretty much all studies on performance shows that you achieve more and perform better if you take breaks and rest. May be sport or chatting with people in office or anything. So I mean, live like monk if that is your dream, but if you want maximum long term performance then 24/7 is likely feel good motivational bullshit.

[jasode]

It seems like the word "advice" has inadvertently poisoned the well for discussion.

Ron Conway wasn't advising the audience to tell their spouse they aren't first in line. Instead, he's offering up his observations of past successful entrepreneurs of big internet startups. Observations != advice.

If there are abundant counterexamples of tech startups that became successful even though the founder worked 40 hours and no more, people should list them. Believe me, HN would love to know about them to learn their ideas. The context is the kinds of tech startups that Ron Conway and Paul Graham are discussing.

In any case, the kind of founders that work 80+ hours a week trying to make their startup a success don't need people like RC to give them advice about prioritizing their business over their relationships. The founders are doing that anyway! (E.g. Steve Jobs ignoring his girlfriend & daughter.) RC's just standing on the sidelines relating the behaviors he's observed.

[a_c_s]

It seems like this advice is derived from anecdotes and "gut feeling" rather than data and research.

[Kinnard]

Trained intuition?

[dogecoinbase]

A polite term for unconscious bias.

[Kinnard]

I take it you are being sarcastic. But the two are distinct and it could be a combination of both.

[jdbernard]

The advice here is almost literally: making money is more important than people. And then we wonder why we have companies like Uber captained by people with low regard for others?

[RepressedEmu]

I think the advice is closer to: "If you aren't going to put your startup in front of everything else in your life. It will fail."

Which, at the scale of business they are referring to, might just be the reality. Although I also find it to be a very distasteful warping of human priorities, personally.

[jdbernard]

I agree with you, but I think our two statements are closer in meaning than you think.

The Silicon Valley pattern of VC-backed startups is distinct from other patterns of new business formation. This SV pattern focusses on high-growth and high-valuation. It is specifically geared for wealth-creation. That's the primary motivation for most of the key people involved, definitely the motivation of the investors. It's a well-known fact that VC's need outsized returns for their investment model to make sense. So it's not even just making money that is the priority, it's making a lot of money. There are other more predictable ways to start and build businesses if your goal is not maximum return on investment.

So to me, when an investor says, "If you aren't going to put your startup in front of everything else in your life. It will fail," it sounds a lot like, "Making money is more important than people."

[Kinnard]

I don't think people for whom their startup is their vocation, as that of a priest or a nun, are motivated by money at all actually.

[jdbernard]

Understood, but this isn't a founder pointing out that they have chosen this life, this is an investor (by definition has a profit motive) in an educational context (startup school) saying that founders can't be successful and that they shouldn't even try (question was "how do you know if you have what it takes?") unless they sacrifice everything else in their life for the business.

It's the difference between a priest or a nun following what they believe is their life's calling and a televangelist promising their audience blessing if only they'll sacrificially give their life savings as offering.

It's also worth pointing out that Ron Conway (as far as I can tell) was never actually a founder himself. He's not had to take his own advice. To be fair, I'm not familiar with all the details of his life, so maybe I'm mis-characterizing.

I've spent a good portion or my career working with and for startups and small businesses, so I'm not just against them on principle, but this advice, coming from this source really feels off to me in the same way that as a Christian televangelists feel disturbing and off.

[tpkj]

Sounds like great advice if you are interested in developing coronary heart disease, impaired cognitive ability, and a host of other health-related issues.

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/1005/10051205

http://www.circadian.com/blog/item/22-5-negative-effects-of-...

Oh, and do you literally expect a "great" entrepreneur to work 24/7? Good luck with that. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-long-can-huma...