The Drag Coefficient Scoring System: what size startup is right for you

I have to say, this is utter garbage. Or, it's an interesting concept poorly thought out and implemented.<p>You get "a point" for having a significant other or a serious relationship? Well, what if your significant other (like my wife) is a very smart person you can bounce ideas off of, and makes enough money on their own to pay all your basic bills and living expenses (also canceling out your +1 for a mortgage drag point)?<p>And you get 1 point for every 5 years after 20? Maybe make 30 the baseline there, but really that whole calculation is just off. When I'm hiring someone at a startup I tend to cringe at the 25-and-under crowd with startup stars in their eyes and no experience. THEY are drag on the organization because the majority of them don't know how to work independently and don't know what the company is supposed to look like in 5 years, so they lack a lot of vision and understanding (sorry if this offends anyone reading this, but I've always advocated that people get some real-company experience BEFORE joining a startup).<p>I can see how the kids thing might cramp things a bit (in theory I guess, I don't have any kids, so no real experience there).<p>I also wouldn't recommend that someone rush into their next venture after something else winds down or blows up (as the author of this article did). That seems like a great formula for making poor decisions, fighting some invisible ticking clock.<p>Ugh. I hope nobody actually takes this article too much to heart.

Based on people I've seen, I'd replace "1 point for every 5 years after the age of 20" with "1 point for every 3 years in full-time employment". I think a 25 year old newly minted graduate who is used to living a "student lifestyle" has far less drag than a 23 year old who has spent the last 3 years working full-time and enjoying money.

For what it's worth, I had a 'drag' score of 7 when I founded my startup. Without a wife and a child to motivate me to try harder, and without 10+ years of experience in technology, I would never have been able to accomplish half of what I've done.

I'd subtract two points for every startup you've already worked in, especially the failed ones. Every time you do a startup it does get easier. I've met a few people in Silicon Valley who were shoulder deep in their thirties, with kids, and working at their fourth or fifth startup.

He forgot at least one... In my case:<p>Medical Issues: +1 to +inf points, depending.<p>i.e., I have migraines, 5+ docs to see about them, lots of pills and meds to buy, etc. Definitely getting good use out of my megacorp insurance plan &#38; psuedo-unlimited sick leave.<p>Ignoring the migraines, I only have 1 point in his system, but there's no way I could do a startup right now... I had more sick hours than work hours last week.

If you have a spouse (+1), subtract two points if she has a good enough job to support both of you.

Nice to know that age and experience count against you, as does the potential 2nd income that a spouse brings in.

Subtract 5 points if you studied fluid mechanics and know what a drag coefficient really is.

There's something about this approach I don't <i>want</i> to grok. This would mean that if you are young with little experience, you live in an apartment and you're alone - you should be a founder, not a part of the "hiring wave" for a more mature start up.<p>This also means that a more experienced, successful, and wealthy man with a small family may too be old or have too many children to start his own company. Logic should suggest that its the perfect time, when you have 25 years of experience under your belt.<p>Personally, there should only be two real indicators of any size start up you take: 1) what do you feel you are capable of and 2) how far you are willing to go (whatever your priorities may be).

This formula is for someone who has relatively little money. Don't discount the impact of built-up netegg or trust fund baby. People who have money don't have the financial pressure to hold a job and can pursue things interested them, like starting a company. And older people who have done well tend to have a large netegg to enable them to strike out, which explain the surge of entrepreneurship in 40's.<p>The formula is simple: incomings - expenses = netflow; if netflow &#62; 0, you are good to go, else if netegg/netflow &#62; years-of-comfortable-living, you are good to go; otherwise get a job.

So how does the "5 points for every 5 years above 20" stack up against the fact that most successful founders are in their 30s?<p>Seems like a 20-year-old's idealised conceptions of founding start-ups.

There is a second peak of entrepreneurship for folks in their 40's that this does not model accurately at all. Supportive spouse is a plus. Deep domain knowledge and rich social networks are both a plus that come with age and work experience. I agree with his advice to the newly minted MBA but I think his rules of thumb break down for older entrepreneurs.

Score 1, Still feel like I am close to failing. I hope I was in CA, but then again, my problem was so peculiar, and so tough ( NP-Complete), it will probably take more time to build than it might require doing other parts of business. I certainly hope so. That making it work will pay off eventually. I like to compare myself to Google guys. Only in that they tok close to three years before the search engine was good enough to take investments. Of course, I think they were smarter, so does that give me more years to work on. I hope not..<p>:)

A few more revisions: First kid: +2 Each additional kid after the first: +1 Single parent with weekday custody: +10

I score an 11. Damn.