Don’t be fooled, older founders have considerably more assets and a wealth of connections in their industry, as well as older more independent children. This offsets the wife and family effects.
No, because there are a lot less older founders than younger ones. So when you extrapolate from the data it will seem that having a wife and kids is a negative for a founder’s chances of success.
You're actually proving the exact opposite of your initial claim, but at least you are now teasing out the confounding variables that actually explain this.
There is no significant causation related to a founder's marital status.
> Don’t be fooled, older founders have considerably more assets and a wealth of connections in their industry, as well as older more independent children. This offsets the wife and family effects.
> No, because there are a lot less older founders than younger ones. So when you extrapolate from the data it will seem that having a wife and kids is a negative for a founder’s chances of success.
These are the the confounding variables you were looking for. Older founders _are_ more successful and it has to do with, among other things, the experience and connections they have, and that people are more risk-averse as they start families.
_Coincidentally_, the likelihood of being married increases as one's age increases, which is why you see fewer but more successful founders at the ages they are more likely to be married.
Did you read the paper? It's not true that there are a lot less older founders than younger ones. It's roughly a bell curve with the peak around 40 years old.