In domains with extreme outcomes (music, startups), success is heavily influenced by luck, making it difficult to replicate. A more effective strategy is to study the common failure modes of the vast majority of talented people who tried. This provides a clearer roadmap of what to avoid than trying to copy a lucky winner.
Conventional wisdom to 'stay focused' is flawed. Breakthrough growth often comes from making many small, exploratory bets. YipitData's success wasn't from perfecting one thing, but from the one small, tangential bet each year that drove 90% of the growth while others failed.
Bootstrappers should avoid modeling their processes after companies like Apple or Basecamp, who have near-infinite time and resources. Instead, look to other successful solo founders or small teams who operate under similar constraints for more relevant and applicable strategies.
Top growth investors deliberately allocate more of their diligence effort to understanding and underwriting massive upside scenarios (10x+ returns) rather than concentrating on mitigating potential downside. The power-law nature of venture returns makes this a rational focus for generating exceptional performance.
When evaluating others' success, ask if their strategy would work for most people who adopt it, or if it relied heavily on luck. If a strategy isn't reproducible and leaves many casualties behind, it's not a model to be learned from, regardless of the impressive outlier outcome.
Founders who succeed by randomly trying ideas rather than using a systematic process don't learn repeatable skills. This lucky break can be detrimental, as it validates a flawed strategy and prevents the founder from learning the principles needed for consistent, future success.
While no single path guarantees startup success, the phrase "there's no one right answer" is dangerous. It implies all approaches are equally valid, leading founders to choose easy methods over proven, difficult ones. In reality, only a handful of paths are viable, while the vast majority ensure failure.
An entrepreneur's success rate dramatically shifted from 0 for 12 to 5 for 5 not because his execution improved, but because his project selection did. He stopped chasing high-risk, "one in a million" moonshots (like building the next social network) and focused on businesses with clearer paths to revenue (e-commerce, services).
Much online startup advice comes from founders with a single lucky success or a large pre-existing audience, making their advice often not repeatable. Seek guidance from those who have demonstrated success multiple times, proving their methods are based on skill and strategy, not just luck or circumstance.
Rapid startup success stories are misleading. A company's quick victory is almost always the result of its founder's decade-long journey of grinding, learning, and failing. The compounding effect of skills, credibility, and network building is the true engine behind the breakthrough moment.
Lior Susan highlights the biggest mental hurdle for former operators becoming VCs: internalizing the power law. Operators are builders wired to fix problems and believe they can turn any situation around. In VC, success is driven by a few massive outliers, requiring focus on winners, not on fixing every company.