Skip to content

Comment on Why 30 year old entrepreneurs are not over the hill

Comments

When someone says that he will only fund or work with people in their 20s, run. He's looking for a young, inexperienced person who doesn't know his rights and of whom he can take advantage.

Where there is some truth in this is that a 30-year-old first-time entrepreneur usually cannot get terms from a VC that would merit leaving a more stable job. A person of that age with a decent career is unlikely to have much interest in the terms (participating preferred, easy to fire the founders, giving up a lot of board seats, low salary) available to a no-name first-time entrepreneur. If someone who is 35 is willing to take a 3x-liquidation preference and participating preferred, do you really want to fund him? Obviously no, because he either lacks decent options or doesn't understand business, neither of which is a good sign for someone of that age. On the other hand, there are plenty of 22-year-olds with a lot of talent but no sense of what they're worth or what rights they have.

Considering that it takes 7+ years to build a substantial, successful company, if you found a startup when you're 25 and take 7 years to exit, you WILL be > 30 when you're done and available to work on startup #2.

So by this "under 30 only" logic, you would never fund successful serial entrepreneurs. Great idea. :-/

Well said.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.