The Age Question (final post)

So yesterday I pissed off Dave Winer, Scott Karp, Steven Hodson, and a host of others who have weighed in heavily in the comments.

I guess I knew it was gonna happen because I was uneasy about writing the post in the first place.

I've been reluctant because I don't want to pick at this scab of a meme. I really don't want to be the guy who made it harder for anyone older than 30 to get funded in the web services market.

It's also a bit frustrating to me to be so misunderstood. Yesterday's post was the third in a series of musings (yes, that is what they are) on the age question.

It all started with a post where I mentioned several conversations with mid life entrepreneurs I know well who are struggling with "what to do next" issues.

That post was also misinterpreted as a "young is better" post. It wasn't. In that post I pointed out that in our portfolio, there are more 40 and 50 somethings than 20 somethings.

But because I was unhappy with the way people interpreted that post, I followed with one where I said age is a mindset and encouraged entrepreneurs of all ages to go for it. Clay accused me of "waffling" with that second post.

I guess I should have left it at that. But Brad and I were talking on Friday about the sheer volume of young entrepreneurs we are seeing that is unprecedented in my 20 years in the VC business. Contrary to one of the comments from yesterday, this is not like what happened during the bubble. Back then it was newly minted MBAs starting companies out of greed. This is different. This is 15 to 20 year old kids building and launching authentic web services that fill a real need in the market.

Let me re-emphasize a point that I've now made three times but seems to be ignored by all the people who I've annoyed. We have funded only one 20 something entrepreneur in close to 15 investments we've made so far in our fund. I am sure we'll do more but we are not going to be a fund focused on 25 year olds and younger as Scott Karp suggests.

Dave Winer has been a frequent recipient of praise on this blog for inventing the concept of syndication that drives the whole distributed media model. He knows that I think his contributions to the Internet and web services are huge.

So to Dave and everyone else I've pissed off, please take a second to read everything I've written on this subject. I am not an ageist. I would gladly back an entrepreneur who was 80 if they were doing something interesting.

This blog is about transparency - sharing with everyone what I am seeing and thinking. I am seeing way more super young entrepreneurs than I've ever seen. That's a fact. End of story. No more posting on this topic.

Comments

[Shelley]

In this post you're saying that you're seeing a lot of kids creating companies that fill a real need. The real need part is hugely debatable, because I've seen a lot of clones, not to mention ripped off code in some of the 'new' efforts. However, I can believe about the companies because any college student can hack together a company.

But you attached this to being able to see or generate a paradigm shift, which is something massively different. Frankly, you do deserve the ageist term being thrown on you, as others have picked up what you said and extrapolated from that to "old guys can't create new things", according to one of your budding young thing billionaire wannabes.

But let's not stop there -- of the companies that we hear much about, many were created by people in school or right out of school, most came from fairly affluent backgrounds with, we assume, more time and money to experiment, primarily American, white, and male, so let's see you continue your post and write about how only affluent, white, American males understand the net enough to innovate. After all -- if we're looking for patterns within the VC funding community, why stop at just age?

[Scott Karp]

Fred,

You simply can't win with this one -- any discussion of it, no matter how balanced, is bound to piss of some of the people all of the time or all of the people some of the time.

The reality is that age is a double-edged sword. Younger people don't carry the baggage that often hinders innovation, but they also don't have the experience that can prevent naive mistakes (like not seeing your dialog box options through other people's eyes).

Saying that age is a determining factor in entrepreneurial success is like saying that tireless devotion to your idea and attention to detail are determining factors -- there are many factors that are important, but strengths in some can make up for deficits in others.

What's more important than age is probably the ability to constantly challenge your own assumptions and to see your product/service through the eyes of all of the customers you want to serve.

Perhaps it's a bit like fiction writing -- a great writer can see the world through different characters eyes and is not limited by their own identity.

(And you know I was being facetious about a fund for 25 and under -- a great fund is diverse, just like successful entrepreneurs are diverse.)

[scotty the body]

Wow. This points out a big problem with "conversations" in blogs. Personally, I thought your point was clearly articulated, well-made and correct from my perspective.

Your point wasn't that somebody like Winer CAN'T be net native. I consider myself net native -- had a blog and homepage since before they called them "blogs" and since I was 22 or so. But I'm pretty much the only one of my friends from college who is like that. Your point was that this is the first "net native" generation - -where that type of online existence and activity is more normal than abnormal.

[scotty the body]

Oh, and as a second point. You mention that these "net native" youngsters are the types that whip out a quick web service etc. I think this is where being of this generation of "net native" kids is a small, but growing and, eventually, nearly insurmountable advantage. The great developments in software often come from "scratching an itch" -- creating something that one sees as missing from your tools/world/activities.

oldsters like me, Winer and you are simply not going to have the same itches as these youngsters will as they grow in number and their social/cultural interaction begins to produce these needs. In other words, a top-down marketed phenom like Facebook, that probably wasn't started by the chitlins but was massively adopted by them, can always be a hit. But top-down won't dream up some of the things we'll see in the near future.

[Peter]

It's really not that this specific generation is suddenly more creative, or entrepreneurial. It's that we're all communicating differently.

[Jonathan Peterson]

The difference between the newly minted MBAs who "got the internet" and people actually building useful applications IS a huge difference, one that I should have realized that you were aware of.

I still think you completely misunderstood the history behind Andreeson's statement:

The web design patterns he's talking about were developed over the last decade by web developers, graphic designers and information architects through many iterations. Are you REALLY better off with a 20 something aping existing design patterns, or a 30 something information architect who spent the last 8 years DEVELOPING those design patterns?

More important than design patterns to my mind is the stable commercial and open source software stack that allows money to be spent on content and business model specific function, and not web infrastructure.

and VASTLY more important that either of those is broadband penetration and the massive increase in the market size of people who are comfortable working, buying and living online.

[Aruni]

Fred - Happy Father's Day!

This has been an interesting topic to read about. I have to agree with Shelley on her comment that you might as well muse about "only affluent, white, American males understand the net enough to innovate" if you are going to muse about "age." My guess is that 90%+ of ventures funded fit the 'white, American male' category...with a majority of the rest being Asian.

From my experience, VCs try to put in a 'box' their expectations of what good businesses/entrepreneurs look like. However, looking back many of the biggest long term success stories in the recent past probably didn't have VC money thrown at them right out of the gate. They had to prove their market and even convince people that what they were doing was going to make sense because often it didn't make sense at the time (e.g., In the '50s I believe the experts felt the market for personal computers would not exceed something like a handful).

As for why you are seeing more really young entrepreneurs than in the past...my guess is that it might be a 'fad.' It's not easy building a company, but people who are financially successful are put forth as heros in our society so why wouldn't a 15 year old 'go for it?' It's the same reason why a lot of 15 year old guys aim to be football/basketball stars. However becoming a millionaire sports figure takes less up front capital than starting a financially successful business. It's a great dream but few make it to the top.

Personally, I find it difficult to apply hard & fast metrics to such a unique career path as entrepreneurship. Financial success comes in all shapes and sizes. If you'd like to see some articles I've co-written on often well known people's views on success, please see http://www.babblesoft.com/articles.php.

Aruni

[Jesse Chenard]

I dont weigh on too heavily on either side but I will say that is good to see you putting yourself out there. Definitely makes for interesting reading and commentary.

FYI I dont think your posts were unbalanced or unclear. I think people who are reacting harshly one way or another need to just step back and look at the data as you have done. Then they can come up with their own musings. Heck if they are half as interesting as yours people might even read them!

[Terry Jones]

I really don't see what all the fuss is about. Fred posts some observations about the numbers he's seeing, and people take it personally. It could hardly be clearer that he's not ageist. This is shooting the messenger.

The world is a changing place, as usual. Technology and knowledge is better understood and packaged and available, especially to youth, as usual. Kids of 15 can do things today (including starting companies, which takes 10 minutes on the web) that older people wouldn't have dreamed of at 15, as usual.

There's a tendency to let two questions overlap here. One is whether young people do better at starting and running companies, etc. The other is whether young people are inherently different simply because they're young.

I don't think there's enough evidence on the first question to know the answer. Personally, I doubt that young inexperienced people are better than older more experienced people on this question.

But, young people ARE different. They think differently. It's very clear. The easiest way to see it is to ask yourself whether (at least with regards to technology) you're more advanced (or similar word) than your own parents? Of course you are. Of course. How could you not be? Ask all your friends the same question, and they'll probably all say the same thing. Now just extrapolate.

The "but we invented it" argument doesn't hold water. Bicycles were invented many generations ago, and in many respects haven't changed that much. But look at the innovations in cycling of the last 20 years! Kids are doing things on bicycles that people of my generation (I'm 43) never contemplated. Or take skateboards. The basic form hasn't changed much in the last 20 years. Arguably, my generation invented the skateboard. But when we were kids the Ollie and grinding etc. hadn't been thought of and the kinds of tricks that regular kids in the street are doing today would have blown our minds in the 70s. We had almost exactly the same gear. Back then, the ultimate in coolness was to do a few 360's and maybe a handstand. If a mundane object like a skateboard or a bicycle can be put to such novel use, who can doubt what the internet/web can be made to do/look like in the hands of people who push the envelope? It's very clear that successive generations of users (aka "kids") push the envelope.

The internet, and of course the web, are not mature technologies. Our kids are still discovering amazing new way to use bikes 120 years after the invention of the "safety" bicycle. So we probably have a fair way to go on the internet/web. The sheer numbers alone argue that most of the innovation will come from people much younger than the current generation of users, some of whom are undoubtedly yet to be born, and none of whom will have had anything to do with the invention.

In summary: are youth better at starting and running companies? Don't know. Are they different from us? Hell yes.

It's probably useful to keep the two questions apart.

Another thought worth considering: in some cases (see above) it may take adults to invent something and bring it to market, but kids to figure out how to really use it.

[Tim]

Personally, I think it comes down to how far forward you tend to look.

When you're young, you don't have a lot of business experience,so you tend to focus on the immediate: your friends, your users.

When you're older, you focus further out on markets and partnerships -- key areas that can help build a strong, long-term business.

But the Web is expanding and evolving so quickly that thinking too far forward can confuse the clarity and purpose of your startup and really hurt you.

Youtube, for example, would never have been started by a seasoned executive -- it had an anti-business model really (copyright nightmare), but was super-fun for users.

[Eric]

I think it's good to piss people off, that means you've made some others very happy.

Good to stick to your guns and move on. Happy Father's Day Fred.

[nick]

Speaking as one of the younger people, I can say that as far as consumer web products/services go - you couldn't be more on. However, when it comes to running an actual business that depends on something besides AdSense or other online ads? We (my generation) doesn't have the business experience needed to run something like that. The businesses we put together are hacks, that aren't solid, but are "cool" or can get lots of "views" and so they get snatched up.

[Charlie]

"Age" is your "eHub". :)

[angela penny]

I think people misinterpret your observations for an endorsement of the situation. I think it's important to identify the pink elephant in the middle of the livingroom, or however that expression goes. Ageism exists but it's hard to blame the kids, when I was 21 I thought 25 was ancient and had no patience for people over 30 who weren't wildly successful because I assumed that anything could happen in ten years.

[Techie from NYC]

What's really frustrating about this is that the underlying "age good, old bad" attitude trickles down and infects the entire industry. That 26-year-old CEO is not going to be inclined to hire a 43-year old CTO. He's going to hire his buddy, who will tap his network to fill other key slots. Maybe the VCs will help them hire a CFO, but that CFO will probably be the only 40-something in the organization.

I'm 40, have an MBA, and have been working as a tech professional since 1995. I love this business and I still have plenty to contribute -- including the experience of having had my own startup and working at several others. And I'm finding it harder and harder to get a job. I've dyed out the grey in my hair and chopped all pre-1995 history off my resume, in the hopes that that will help, but I think it's the tell-tale date I graduated from college that's the problem. I haven't resorted to lying about when I graduated but that may well be the next step.

What are all us 40-something technologists supposed to do? Conveniently disappear into obscurity? We're not young and sexy anymore, but we know what we're doing and we love to do it. If only someone would hire us and let us prove it.....

[Dave Winer]

Fred, I read your post carefully, and tried to give you the benefit of all the disclaimers you made and wrote mine carefully too.

I don't think I misinterpreted you, rather I didn't interpret you the way you wanted to be interpreted.

I hope this isn't really your final post, because I want this to be the beginning of something, not the end. A long time ago I gave up on being creative with businesses, I think largely because of the bias against people like me. Whether that's a function of age, ethnicity, personal demeanor, appearance, the fact that I blog (and am outspoken) I don't know -- because it's about other people's minds, and I can't read other people's minds.

But I have some ideas and I would love to find a way to work with financiers. So I hope you'll read my post today with an open mind, it's not meant as an attack, it's meant as a proposal to ideate.

[jeneane]

I still say its Asperger's. The first generation has come of age. Selective mutation. Makes me glad I write poetry.

[Peter Armstrong]

I also think that it is a function of the fact that you are a VC who blogs. Of course you're going to see more young people now than you used to! Your blog (and similar VC blogs I read) make VCs seem more open and approachable than I had assumed. I would be willing to bet that you see a higher percentage of young entrepreneurs than non-blogging VCs.

(I am just over 30, so I'm not one of the "net natives" as you defined them, but I'm close. Still, VC blogs have made VCs seem approachable to me, whereas before that was definitely not the case. So, I assume that this applies even more forcefully to young people: I know that when I was 25 I would have never approached a VC, but maybe if I was 25 now I would...)

[anon]

I'm always in awe when I read a post by Shelley :)

(Sorry for the spam)

[Jeremy Toeman]

Fred,
I think the series of posts were all well-written, and I believe we are unfortunately living in a time where people almost seek to take offense at a comment. I interpret your posts as "there's a whole generation of people whose worldview is heavily influenced on having computers and the Internet always accessible and their inventions will be radically different than generations before them." I still don't get how others are reading "old people are dumb" (or whatever they want to think), but it's disappointing that the main discussion amongst your naysayers has twisted the theme so far.

Keep it up!
jt

[Damien Mulley]

Pissing people off is good. Gets them off their collective asses and might get them starting something they might not have. Your blog posts on this matter were not trolling but they could still make people get riled up enough to finally start that "thing" they always wanted to start. I'm reminded of Principle Skinner in the Simpsons "Oh Edna we both know these children have no future!! *uneasy laughter* Prove me wrong kids, prove me wrong!"

Over here in Ireland it appears we have absolutely no kids and no young people trying their hand at building anything. They all want jobs working in insurance companies and banks. Nobody wants to take risks and be the next "whoever".

[Ann Bernard]

I believe the string of comments in all the posts related to this topic are a clear indication of how people choose to see themselves and the world. You can accept, perceive or believe what someone else chooses to say based on their observations or come to your own conclusions.

You can allow your own conclusions and those of others to further confirm a belief that will hinder your own actions and decisions or do what you were setting out to do anyway.

Even if it was a fact(which it obviously is not and never will be) that all funds being funded today were those of 15-20 year olds, white or Asian males, it wouldn't stop me from going after my own funding and finding a way to get funded.

Sharing of opinions is wonderful. Making educated and non-emotional decisions is always key, no matter what.

Always keep your course and be careful of what perceptions you choose...because that's when they will become your reality and your excuses.

[Todd Cochrane]

Being a 40+ CEO that is boot strapping a podcast media company startup, with a team of very talented 27 to 50 years olds has been very rewarding.

The risk are more pronounced as we all have families and children to raise. That being said we really examined critically the revenue models so as to make sure what we have road mapped will succeed.

At 40+ I put in 18-20 hours days, seven days a week into the company as the stakes are much larger for us as it would be for a 20 year old that can just move on to the next venture or can fallback to a family support syetsm

The maturity of the team also allows us to pull past experiences into the equation and while my company faces the challenge of not being part of the "IN" crowd in the Valley, and also overcoming perceptions like you have written.

We have team members that are full time on this venture without pay, with families that have made a commitments to this venture beyond what most 20 year olds would ever be able to make in similar circumstances.

[Sridhar Vembu]

Here is a comic take:
http://toondoo.com/toondoo/View.toon?param=28682

[David]

It's not just funding it's management teams too. I'm in my thirties and have much to offer many start ups. Not as many people are reaching out as too many people are still building companies like pyramids instead of tree trunks.