Is founding or leading a hypergrowth startup fundamentally better suited to younger people without family obligations?

Paul Graham · published May 2005

Undergraduates are too risk-averse, which is a mistake because the young can afford more risk than anyone.

The younger you are, the more risk you can take.

source Hiring is Obsolete

Paul Graham · published Oct 2006

A 25-year-old founder is a better bet than a 32-year-old, because although the older one is probably a better programmer, he has a much more expensive life.

The main cost in software startups is people; guys with kids and mortgages are at a real disadvantage, while a 25 year old has some work experience but can live as cheaply as an undergrad.

Scope: software startups

source A Student's Guide to Startups

Paul Graham · published Mar 2007

Having a family to support is a genuine reason not to start a startup; he will advise 22 year olds to do it but not people with families.

A 22 year old who fails will learn a lot and can still get a job; he won't take responsibility for advising someone with dependents.

Scope: a matter of what he's willing to advise, not of whether it's a bad idea

source Why to Not Not Start a Startup

Emil Michael · published Oct 24, 2022

Tech startups are a young person's game because young people have the time, energy and risk appetite that people with families don't

Having become a father at 50, he can't see how the seventy-hour weeks he loved at Uber would be compatible with a successful marriage and a child

Scope: framed as 'whether I like it or not'

48:57 20VC: Uber's Journey to Becoming the Most Valuable Private Tech Company in History, Raising $3BN From Saudi in Just 60 Days, Uber's $30BN Mistake in Food Delivery, Why Recent Uber M&A Will be the Worst in Tech & Mastering Negotiations and Deal-Making with

Harry Stebbings · published Oct 24, 2022

It's better to back older founders than younger ones

In good times younger founders buy the hype and believe they're God's gift while older ones have seen cycles; in bad times younger founders are overwhelmed emotionally while older ones have perspective from things like children's health and stay calm

49:42 Older founders are preferable due to perspective and emotional stability across cycles

Emil Michael · published Oct 24, 2022 · hedged

Age suitability depends on growth type: true hypergrowth companies require the youth-stage capacity, while for normal venture-backable growth older, more even-tempered founders may indeed be better

Uber and Airbnb grew faster geographically and in revenue than any company in the world, including Google, and he doesn't think that's humanly possible without being at that stage of life; industries that don't permit that growth reward maturity in the highs and lows

50:15 Suitability depends on growth type hypergrowth needs youth normal growth favors older founders

Paul Graham · published Mar 2007

Lower-risk paths exist for those with families—turning consulting into a product business, or joining an early startup—but consulting rarely converts successfully.

Empirically the chances of turning consulting into a product business seem very small, though you'll never lack income; being one of the first employees resembles founding.

source Consulting to product conversion rarely succeeds joining an early startup is a lower risk alternative for people with families

Paul Graham · published Oct 2006

Rootlessness is an advantage because a lot of startups involve moving, and young founders without houses, possessions, or serious relationships can relocate easily.

The Kiko founders could easily decide to move to the Bay Area because neither has a serious girlfriend and everything they own fits in one car.

source Rootlessness lack of possessions and relationships enables easy relocation for startups

Paul Graham · published May 2005

Because risk and reward are proportionate over time, young people should take the riskiest investments — including insanely risky career bets in their early twenties.

Riskier assets like stocks beat bonds over long horizons even though they fluctuate year to year, so what you should hold depends on how soon you need the money; undergrads' investable asset is their time.

source Risk and reward are proportionate over time so the young should take maximally risky career bets

Paul Graham · published May 2005

Choosing stability — buying bonds or working for a big company — costs you, because market forces make people pay a premium for it.

Risk is proportionate to reward because people will pay extra for stability.

source Stability seeking carries an opportunity cost since people pay a premium for safety

Paul Graham · published May 2005 · hedged

Undergrads are risk-averse because they have spent their first twenty years being piped from one institution to another, making a job look like the next stop on the same line.

They had little choice about schools and it was understood they'd go to college, so after twenty years riding the same subway line the next stop seems to be a job.

source Institutional conveyor belt conditioning explains undergraduate risk aversion toward founding