> The second counterintuitive point, this might come as a little bit of a disappointment, but what you need to succeed in a startup is not expertise in startups. That makes this class different from most other classes you take. You take a French class, at the end of it you've learned how to speech French. You do the work, you may not sound exactly like a French person, but pretty close, right? This class can teach you about startups, but that is not what you need to know. What you need to know to succeed in a startup is not expertise in startups, what you need is expertise in your own users.
Mark Zuckerberg did not succeed at Facebook because he was an expert in startups, he succeeded despite being a complete noob at startups; I mean Facebook was first incorporated as a Florida LLC. Even you guys know better than that. He succeeded despite being a complete noob at startups because he understood his users very well. Most of you don't know the mechanics of raising an angel round, right? If you feel bad about that, don't, because I can tell you Mark Zuckerberg probably doesn't know the mechanics of raising an angel round either; if he was even paying attention when Ron Conway wrote him the big check, he probably has forgotten about it by now.
I agree that this talk is useless, even dangerous, unless you are post A series.
Mark Zuckerberg is probably the worst possible example to use about anything startup related other than how to use one's wealthy parents' money and connections (and the connections' money) to start a company.
Edit for further explanation: Zuckerberg's initial capital for Facebook came from his father and his father's friends. He had been tutored privately from a young age, much like Bill Gates was, and he'd already had extensive experience working in founder-like roles by the time he made Facebook. His life is best used an example to demonstrate the immense advantage being born into a life of wealth and privilege confers, not as an example for what (or what not) to do when starting up a company for the typical person. His life is so removed from that that using it as an example is tantamount to uttering gibberish.
Zuckerberg's bio on Wikipedia says that he is the son of a dentist and a psychiatrist. I'm sure there are plenty of Americans with wealthier or more connected families, and none of them have succeeded with their startup the way he has.
I'm sure there are plenty of Americans with wealthier or more connected families
Sure, but only about 5%. The median salary for a dentist and a psychiatrist adds up to $333,000 which is the 95% percentile for household income today. A verrry long way from average.
Zuckerburg is a bad example; Facebook was his 3rd company, and his second (Synapse Media Player) reputedly got a million-dollar buyout offer from Microsoft. There are many reasons he might've chosen to incorporate as a Florida LLC; the likely one is that past experience with startups told him it wasn't important and could be fixed later, so he chose the simplest option.
Your overall point stands - Google or E-bay would be much better examples, as they really were started by first-time founders.
Mark Zuckerberg did not succeed at Facebook because he was an expert in startups, he succeeded despite being a complete noob at startups; I mean Facebook was first incorporated as a Florida LLC. Even you guys know better than that. He succeeded despite being a complete noob at startups because he understood his users very well. Most of you don't know the mechanics of raising an angel round, right? If you feel bad about that, don't, because I can tell you Mark Zuckerberg probably doesn't know the mechanics of raising an angel round either; if he was even paying attention when Ron Conway wrote him the big check, he probably has forgotten about it by now.
I agree that this talk is useless, even dangerous, unless you are post A series.