[toomuchtodo]

How many YC founders end up rich before 30? Or even at all? I think it’s likely a highly valuable experience running a business experiment someone else will fund (not to mention connections you wouldn’t otherwise make), but the odds of actual, liquid wealth from the experience and time spent are very low.

[mikert89]

Alot of them do, not only that, they build skills that help them start their next company. Many of which are bootstrapped and profitable. This whole idea that startups are a complete lottery ticket is not only false, its increasingly less false, more money is being made now in startups than ever

[toomuchtodo]

Based on public exit and liquidity event information, startups still remain a lottery ticket for most. 90% of startups fail entirely, for example (CB Insights). YC startups have more longevity, and more get to a Series A then non YC startups, but the best batches based on performance have been between 2009 and 2013. 10% achieve an exit, 4.5% became unicorns. Only 17 companies backed by YC (out of almost 5k) have gone public, and all except Airbnb, Instacart, and Reddit have underperformed post IPO.

Have fun, learn, develop and grow your skills and network, take the investment, but it’s important to be honest with one’s self about odds of success and outcome. If you win, respect and appreciate the lottery ticket for what it was. Hard work and years of grinding is table stakes, but you can still fail (and most do).

https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/pulling-back-the-curtain-...

https://www.marketsentiment.co/p/the-yc-report

[bix6]

> More than 50% of companies are still alive after 10 years

I’d rather have a 50% chance at my own startup being alive after 10 years than go work some big corp job.

[toomuchtodo]

To each their own. If you must do a startup, do so. My comments should be treated as informing prior to an informed decision.

[koolba]

If you work for 10 years in big tech and save your money, you’d have enough for a lifetime of chasing startup ideas.

[in_cahoots]

This is the part I think young people don't understand. My husband and I worked around 16 years combined in tech. We started pretty late, since we both have PhDs, and we're not engineers so we aren't making top of the market. We still had enough money after that time to buy a house, have 2 kids and go on a multi-year sabbatical. And most of this working period was not at FAANGs.

If you're young, talented, single and bringing home $200k a year including RSUs, you are on track to basically do whatever you want in a decade. Make it to senior manager / Staff level and you should be clearing $400k a year at least. And if you do it smartly you're working 9-5, not some 996 bullshit. That's a ridiculous amount of money.

It's not as sexy as building a startup. But at least for me the ROI has been incredible. And I'm not super smart- my whole college career I looked down at people who spent their lives in front of a computer. I completely missed the trend of tech and Silicon Valley, and I definitely don't work any harder than the next guy. But if you do good work I've found that it tends to pay off.

[brap]

People really underestimate how much FAANG pays, all things considered.

If you spent the last 10-15 years as an engineer/manager in FAANG (and these past 5-10 years have been very far from what’s called the “golden age”), and were financially responsible, you’re a multi millionaire, most likely still in your 30s.

If you’re a couple that worked there, well damn you’re not just rich you are wealthy.

I can’t think of a better starting point for founding a startup. Or retiring.

Sacrificing 10 years seems a lot when you’re fresh out of college. But 1. it’s not really a sacrifice since your life is much more comfy than most 2. in the grand scheme of things 10 years is not a lot. You will most likely spend way more time on a failed startup while having the worst time.

[raspasov]

I have a problem with the analogy “lottery ticket”. I think analogies are helpful as long as we are talking perhaps a singe order of magnitude difference between the two things.

The chance of winning most popular US lotteries is approximately 1 in 300,000,000. In comparison, the chance of IPO-ing a YC company is approximately 1 in 300. You can count how many orders of magnitude of difference that is.

[toomuchtodo]

I buy a lottery ticket for $1, in a moment, with no further effort. A YC startup founder grinds for years, if not a decade, to reach IPO with unknown opportunity costs. They are not the same. How many lottery tickets over how many lottery draws to equalize the odds is a fun thought experiment to quantify a dollar value for the option premium.

17 YC IPOs over how many total YC founder years (Lifetime YC companies * # of founders * years YC company active, roughly)?

(I’ve put a lot of thought into being a founder, from an aggressively data driven perspective about how to spend time, which is non renewable)

[raspasov]

It's all about the opportunity cost. There are always assumptions that need to be made, but it will be hard to argue that lottery tickets are better than startups. I don't think they are.

A more useful comparison would be a serious statistical analysis between startups and other occupations.

[raw_anon_1111]

I am not spending years of my life trading money for lottery tickets, startups are worse than lottery tickets

[mikert89]

10% chance at millions fresh out school sounds great!

[pclmulqdq]

If you think "exit" automatically means millions, you've probably never seen an exit before. Of those that exit, the majority of startups get almost $0 for the common shareholders. I continue to believe that a lot of YC's alpha comes from the fact that they are very good at angling people toward small exits where they basically make no money but YC recovers their investment.

[bangaladore]

10% of 0.01% of people is probably closer. 0.01% is probably way to high even.