Quantcast
Channel: Business Insider
Viewing all 120553 articles
Browse latest View live

This map shows the most educated small town in every state

$
0
0

Most educated states

  • Educational achievement varies across the US.
  • Using data from the US Census Bureau, we found the town in every state with the biggest share of adults who have at least a bachelor's degree.
  • Several wealthy suburban and exurban enclaves appear on the list, like Scarsdale, New York, and Chevy Chase, Maryland.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Different places have different levels of educational achievement.

The American Community Survey is an annual survey run by the Census Bureau to allow the government, corporate and academic researchers, and anyone who is curious about demographics to better understand the US population. Among many other subjects, the ACS includes questions about respondents' education levels.

Read more: All 50 states and Washington, DC, ranked from least to most average

Using the ACS estimates from 2013 to 2017 for places with an at least a 1,000-person population, Business Insider made a map showing the town in each state with the highest percentage of adults over 25 who have at least a bachelor's degree.

Some of the places were college and university campuses; we excluded those from our analysis, instead focusing on incorporated towns and cities and unincorporated census-designated areas.

Several wealthy suburban and exurban enclaves appear on the list, like Scarsdale, New York, and Chevy Chase, Maryland.

Here's a bit more about each of the towns, according to the American Community Survey results and our own research:

Mountain Brook, Alabama

Population: 20,438

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 85.4%

Mountain Brook is an affluent suburb of Birmingham.



Chena Ridge, Alaska

Population: 6,155

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 56.4%

Chena Ridge is a Census-designated place, and is located outside Fairbanks.



Fort Valley, Arizona

Population: 1,195

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 73.7%

Fort Valley is located just outside of Flagstaff.



Cave Springs, Arkansas

Population: 3,320

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 51.4%

Cave Springs is a small town in Benton County.



Ladera, California

Population: 1,553

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 93.6%

Ladera is a small residential community in San Mateo County.



Cherry Hills Village, Colorado

Population: 6,542

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 81.4%

Cherry Hills is an affluent town in Arapahoe County.



Darien, Connecticut

Population: 21,742

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 81.0%

Darien is a wealthy suburb located between Stamford and Norwalk.



Greenville, Delaware

Population: 2,305

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 75.1%

Greenville is an affluent suburb of Philadelphia and Wilmington.



Key Biscayne, Florida

Population: 13,074

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 74.4%

Key Biscayne is an island outside Miami.



Druid Hills, Georgia

Population: 13,895

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 83.9%

Druid Hills is home to the main campus of Emory University.



Maunawili, Hawaii

Population: 2,020

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 61.3%

Maunawili is a residential area near Honolulu.



Hidden Springs, Idaho

Population: 2,515

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 66.2%

Hidden Springs is a community in Ada County.



Kenilworth, Illinois

Population: 2,547

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 91.0%

Kenilworth is a suburban village north of Chicago.



Meridian Hills, Indiana

Population: 1,813

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 80.6%

Meridian Hills is a suburb of Indianapolis.



University Heights, Iowa

Population: 1,242

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 83.3%

University Heights is near the University of Iowa campus.



Mission Hills, Kansas

Population: 3,578

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 88.8%

Mission Hills is home to the Kansas City Country Club.



Indian Hills, Kentucky

Population: 2,958

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 84.5%

Indian Hills is an affluent suburb of Louisville, and is the hometown of actress Jennifer Lawrence.



Oak Hills Place, Louisiana

Population: 8,980

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 63.6%

Oak Hills Place is a wealthy suburb of Baton Rouge.



Cumberland Center, Maine

Population: 2,492

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 74.4%

Cumberland Center is a neighborhood in Cumberland, Maine.



Chevy Chase, Maryland

Population: 2,960

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 93.0%

Chevy Chase is an affluent suburb of Washington, DC.



Brookline, Massachusetts

Population: 59,246

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 83.0%

Brookline is part of the Greater Boston area, and several colleges are located in or near the town, including Newbury College and parts of Boston University.



Huntington Woods, Michigan

Population: 6,347

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 79.8%

Huntington Woods is a residential suburb of Detroit.



North Oaks, Minnesota

Population: 4,961

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 76.5%

North Oaks is a suburb of Saint Paul.



Madison, Mississippi

Population: 25,350

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 64.6%

Madison is a city in the Jackson metropolitan area.



Ladue, Missouri

Population: 8,591

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 83.1%

Ladue is an affluent suburb of St. Louis.



Bozeman, Montana

Population: 43,132

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 56.9%

Montana State University is located in Bozeman.



Chadron, Nebraska

Population: 5,704

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 42.9%

Chadron is home to Chadron State College.



Incline Village, Nevada

Population: 8,795

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 54.9%

Incline Village is a community on Lake Tahoe, and is home to Sierra Nevada College.



Hanover, New Hampshire

Population: 8,495

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 81.7%

Hanover is home to Dartmouth College.



Short Hills, New Jersey

Population: 13,092

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 88.9%

Short Hills is an affluent suburban town in Essex County, near New York City.



San Antonito, New Mexico

Population: 1,141

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 77.1%

San Antonito is a small town in Bernalillo County. 



Scarsdale, NY

Population: 17,856

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 89.0%

Scarsdale is an affluent suburb of New York City located in Westchester County.



Biltmore Forest, North Carolina

Population: 1,517

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 83.5%

Biltmore Forest is adjacent to the Biltmore Estate, a sprawling mansion and grounds built by the descendants of the 19th century railroad magnate Cornelius Vanderbilt.



Horace, North Dakota

Population: 2,603

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 43.1%

Horace is a suburb of Fargo, and the city is named after 19th century newspaper publisher Horace Greeley.



The Village of Indian Hill, Ohio

Population: 5,853

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 86.7%

Indian Hill is an affluent suburb of Cincinnati.



Nichols Hills, Oklahoma

Population: 3,866

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 80.6%

Nichols Hills is a wealthy suburb of Oklahoma City.



Bethany, Oregon

Population: 23,177

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 68.6%

Bethany is an unincorporated town outside Portland.



Devon, Pennsylvania

Population: 1,749

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 83.0%

Devon is an affluent Philadelphia suburb, and hosts an annual horse show.



Kingston, Rhode Island

Population: 6,983

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 65.9%

Kingston is home to the University of Rhode Island's main campus.



Sullivan's Island, South Carolina

Population: 2,050

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 79.3%

Sullivan's Island is an affluent Charleston suburb.



Vermillion, South Dakota

Population: 10,687

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 57.9%

The University of South Dakota is located in Vermillion.



Belle Meade, Tennessee

Population: 2,584

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 83.3%

Belle Meade is a wealthy suburb of Nashville.



University Park, Texas

Population: 24,692

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 87.2%

University Park, located outside Dallas, is home to Southern Methodist University.



Emigration Canyon, Utah

Population: 1,931

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 78.0%

Emigration Canyon is a small township east of Salt Lake City.



Woodstock, Vermont

Population: 1,156

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 64.3%

Woodstock is a small, tourism-centered town in Windsor County.



Wolf Trap, Virginia

Population: 17,086

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 84.3%

Wolf Trap is located in Fairfax County, outside Washington, DC.



Yarrow Point, Washington

Population: 1,184

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 83.2%

Yarrow Point is an affluent suburb of Seattle.



Cheat Lake, West Virginia

Population: 9,540

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 53.4%

Cheat Lake is a community outside Morgantown, WV, near the Pennsylvania border.



Shorewood Hills, Wisconsin

Population: 2,105

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 88.5%

Shorewood Hills is a suburb of Madison, and is close to the University of Wisconsin's campus.



Wilson, Wyoming

Population: 1,991

Share of population over 25 years old with at least a bachelor's degree: 70.6%

Wilson is a small town in Teton County, outside Jackson, WY.




YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki reveals how she deals with male 'microaggressions' and makes her points forcefully (GOOGL, GOOG)

$
0
0

youtube ceo Susan Wojcicki

  • As a woman in tech, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki deals with male microaggressions, even at the C-suite level.
  • "There are micro-aggressions that people aren't always aware of and that can have a cumulative effect ... I've also developed techniques, over 20 years of being in the industry, of learning how to have my words taken seriously, and how to get attention," Wojcicki said in an interview with The Guardian.
  • Wojcicki's techniques include calling out microaggressions when she sees them, stating her comments confidently, disagreeing without hedging, and getting more women into tech.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki still deals with microaggressions from male colleagues as a woman in tech, despite her 20-year career in Silicon Valley and her C-suite position.

"I feel like I've been supported ... for the most part. But a lot of times there are microaggressions that people aren't always aware of and that can have a cumulative effect," Wojcicki said in an interview with Guardian reporter Emine Saner.

Read more:YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki says she takes her 5 kids' phones away during battles over their screen time

These microaggressions include Wojcicki not being taken seriously, being spoken over, and having her ideas ignored. Wojcicki said she's learned throughout the course of her career to call people out on sexism and microaggressions.

Alternately, she finds ways to get people to initially pay attention to her words, and then really listen.

One technique she describes is to state her comments confidently.

"What I find is, you can't say comments in a timid, unsure way — no one's going to listen to you and no one's going to take you seriously," Wojcicki told The Guardian.

Another technique is to disagree without hedging. "You have to say something like: 'No, I completely disagree with your point of view, you're going in the wrong direction. Let me tell you what I think is the right step for the future," Wojcicki said. "And then you've opened the door and people are paying attention."

Wojcicki said that one of her long-term strategies is getting more women into tech.

"If only 25% of people coming into tech are women, then there are some stories and some perspectives that are not being shared," Wojcicki said to The Guardian.

Read more: YouTube's CEO was asked whether she actually meant her apology to the LGBTQ community, and the crowd broke out in applause

The percentage of women employees at Google his jumped from one-quarter to one-third of total employees under Wojcicki's leadership, The Guardian reports. Wojcicki identified the challenge of bolstering the number of women in tech as twofold: getting women into tech initially, and then keeping them.

With so few women graduating with degrees in computer science — Wojcicki says just 20% of graduates identify as women — the challenge becomes getting the network started from a smaller pool.

"It's always hard if you're the first woman, the only woman," Wojcicki told The Guardian. "But if you're working in an organization where there are a significant number, and not just in the entry-level positions, then younger women understand that they can also achieve these leadership roles."

Once women are at tech companies like Google, keeping them at those companies throughout their careers with policies like maternity leave are important, Wojcicki said. Google offers six months of paid maternity leave; the US doesn't mandate that companies offer any paid leave for new mothers.

"After I had my last child, I was thinking on day 10: 'How would I feel if I had to come back right now?'" Wojcicki said to The Guardian, after discussing that one quarter of American women return to work just 10 days after giving birth. "I thought: 'I wouldn't – I'd rather quit.'"

Read Susan Wojcicki's full interview with The Guardian here.

SEE ALSO: 12 former Facebook insiders who ditched the company and are now outspoken critics

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Jeff Bezos is worth over $160 billion — here's how the world's richest man makes and spends his money

14 things successful people do right before bed

$
0
0

sleeping

The last thing you do before bed tends to have a significant impact on your mood and energy level the next day, as it often determines how well and how much you sleep.

Successful people understand that their success starts and ends with their mental and physical health, which is almost entirely dependent upon their getting enough sleep.

Read more: Elon Musk says grueling 120-hour work weeks are taking a toll on his health — here's what sleeping less than 7 hours a night can do to you

That is why good bedtime routines are a key ritual for so many of them.

Here's what many successful people do right before bed.

SEE ALSO: Science says parents of successful kids have these 9 things in common

1. They read

Experts agree that reading is the very last thing most successful people do before going to sleep —President Barack Obama and Bill Gates are known to read for at least a half hour before bed.

Michael Kerr, an international business speaker and author of "You Can't Be Serious! Putting Humor to Work," says he knows numerous business leaders who block off time just before bed for reading, going so far as to schedule it as a "non-negotiable item" on their calendar.

"This isn't necessarily reserved just for business reading or inspirational reading. Many successful people find value in being browsers of information from a variety of sources, believing it helps fuel greater creativity and passion in their lives," he says.

 



2. They unplug completely

The blue light from your phone mimics the brightness of the sun, which tells your brain to stop producing melatonin, an essential hormone that regulates your circadian rhythm and tells your body when it's time to wake and when it's time to sleep. This could lead not only to poor sleep, but also to vision problems, cancer, and depression.

Michael Woodward, Ph.D., organizational psychologist and author of "The YOU Plan," agrees, saying, "The last thing you need is to be lying in bed thinking about an email you just read from that overzealous boss who spends all their waking hours coming up with random requests driven by little more than a momentary impulse."

Give yourself a buffer period of at least a half-hour between the time you read your last email and the time you go to bed. 



3. They disconnect from work

Truly successful people do anything but work right before bed, Kerr says. They don't obsessively check their email, and they try not to dwell on work-related issues. 

Studies have found if you associate your bed with work, it'll be much harder to relax there, so it's essential you reserve your bed for sleep and sex only.

Disconnecting from work is important once you get home, and especially right before bed. It's good to let your mind recharge, spend time doing something you enjoy, and feel ready to tackle the next day. 

Work burnout may actually hinder your productivity by causing you to become easily irritated or stressed out. Taking time after work to fully disconnect from your job may actually increase your productivity the next day. You'll be feeling fresh and ready to take on the day's tasks.



4. They make a to-do list.

"Clearing the mind for a good night sleep is critical for a lot of successful people," Kerr says.

"Often they will take this time to write down a list of any unattended items to address the following day, so these thoughts don't end up invading their headspace during the night."

For example, Kenneth Chenault, former CEO of American Express, writes down three things he wants to accomplish the next day.



5. They spend time with family.

Woodward says it's important to make some time to chat with your partner, talk to your kids, or play with your dog.

Laura Vanderkam, author of "I Know How She Does It" and "What the Most Successful People Do Before Breakfast," says this is a common practice among the highly successful. "I realize not everyone can go to bed at the same time as his or her partner, but if you can, it's a great way to connect and talk about your days."



6. They spend quality time with their partners.

Another great way to connect with your partner: sex.

Apart from the health benefits — sex is exercise, after all, and it can reduce stress and anxiety levels — and the positive effect it has on your relationship with your partner, a study published by The Institute for the Study of Labor in Germany also found a correlation between sexual frequency and wealth.

The study found that people who had sex four or more times a week earned a salary 5% higher than those who didn't, and those who said they weren't having sex at all made 3.2% less than their counterparts who were having sex.

"People need to love and be loved (sexually and non-sexually) by others," study author Nick Drydakis, an economics lecturer at Anglia Ruskin University in Cambridge, England, told CBS News. "In the absence of these elements, many people become susceptible to loneliness, social anxiety, and depression that could affect their working life."

 



7. They go for an evening stroll.

Joel Gascoigne, cofounder and CEO of Buffer, takes a 20-minute walk every evening before bed. "This is a wind-down period, and allows me to evaluate the day's work, think about the greater challenges, gradually stop thinking about work, and reach a state of tiredness," he writes in a blog post

While it's a popular belief that exercise before bed can prevent sleep, the National Sleep Foundation found that exercising whenever you can, even at night, helps you sleep better. Numerous studies have also found walking to reduce stress and anxiety.



8. They reflect on the good things from the day.

Kerr says many successful people take the time just before bed to reflect on, or to write down, three things they are appreciative of that happened that day. 

"Keeping a 'gratitude journal' also reminds people of the progress they made that day in any aspect of their life, which in turn serves as a key way to stay motivated, especially when going through a challenging period."

It's easy to fall into the trap of replaying negative situations from the day that you wish you had handled differently. Regardless of how badly the day went, successful people typically manage to avoid that pessimistic spiral of negative self-talk because they know it will only create more stress.

Benjamin Franklin famously asked himself the same self-improvement question every night: "What good have I done today?"

 



9. They picture tomorrow's success.

Many successful people take a few minutes before bed to envision a positive outcome unfolding for the projects they're working on, says Lynn Taylor, a national workplace expert and author of "Tame Your Terrible Office Tyrant: How to Manage Childish Boss Behavior and Thrive in Your Job." "For most, this is not a task or exercise; they're wired with a gift of solid resolution skills that come naturally."



10. They meditate.

Many successful people use the 10 minutes before bed to meditate. Dale Kurow, a New York-based executive coach, says it's a great way to relax your body and quiet your mind.



11. They plan out sleep.

"Much has been written around the dangers busy people face running chronic sleep deficits, so one habit I know several highly successful people do is to simply make it a priority to get enough sleep — which can be a challenge for workaholics or entrepreneurs," Kerr says. One way to do that is to go to bed at a consistent time each evening, which is a key habit all sleep experts recommend to help ensure a healthy night's sleep.

Vanderkam further suggests that you plan out when you're going to wake up, count back however many hours you need to sleep, and then consider setting an alarm to remind yourself to get ready for bed. "The worst thing you can do is stay up late then hit snooze in the morning," she says. "Humans have a limited amount of willpower. Why waste that willpower arguing with yourself over when to get up, and sleeping in miserable nine-minute increments?"



12. They keep a hygiene ritual.

The National Sleep Foundation recommends you create a hygiene ritual that sends a psychological signal that you are getting ready for bed. This can include brushing your teeth, washing your face, flossing, combing your hair.

Stephen King's nightly routine includes washing his hands and making sure all the pillows face a certain way.



13. They decompress

Maybe you like taking a warm bath. Perhaps listening to calming music relaxes you. 

The most successful people find ways to unwind and decompress before heading to bed. It allows them to de-stress, fall asleep quicker, and sleep more soundly so they're ready for the next day.



14. They skip the wine

When researching her sleep manifesto, "Thrive," Huffington consulted a number of sleep specialists for tips. One of her favorites is avoiding alcohol right before bedtime.

While alcohol can certainly help you fall asleep, the National Institute of Health finds that it robs you of quality sleep. Alcohol keeps people in the lighter stages of sleep from which they can be awakened easily and prevents them from falling into deeper, more restorative stages of sleep, the institute finds.



Founders and investors whose startups died reveal the traps that killed their companies — and what you can do to avoid them

$
0
0

work stress

  • At least half of startups fail — but it's not always clear why.
  • The implications of startup failure can be dire. Just 12 startups that failed in 2018 took $1.4 billion in venture-capital funding with them
  • We asked founders and investors whose companies have died about the most common reasons — and how to avoid them.
  • Those reasons include blindly pursuing your passion and not being able to meet investors' standards.
  • You can avoid those problems by pairing passion with preparation and by thinking carefully about raising venture money.
  • Click here for more BI Prime content.

That won't be me.

In the nearly two decades he's spent teaching business-school students and aspiring entrepreneurs, Noam Wasserman has heard that phrase more times than he can count. Even if students aren't so audacious as to say it out loud, he knows they're thinking it.

Avoiding difficult conversations with your cofounder around splitting equity? Letting passion and excitement cloud your judgment? Few entrepreneurs believe it could happen to them — or that it could lead to the death of their startup.

Wasserman is the dean of Yeshiva University's Sy Syms School of Business; he previously taught at Harvard Business School and the University of Southern California Marshall School of Business. Business Insider recently sat in on a Founder Bootcamp presented by the Yeshiva University Innovation Lab in New York City.

From 8 am to 4 pm, Wasserman ran through a deck on the science of startup success and paced between desks in a basement-level conference room, moderating the debates that sprung up between entrepreneurs in the crowd.

Some thought starting a company without cofounders was advisable; others disagreed. Some were convinced that a founding CEO should see the company all the way through an exit; others were open to the possibility of replacing that person.

Above all, Wasserman advised the entrepreneurs present to look at case studies in which founders ran into problems and to consider how they'd handle the situation. Simply by acknowledging the risk of startup failure, they're arming themselves against it.

In fact, Wasserman said, a simple motto can keep entrepreneurs on their toes as they review the challenges that other startups have faced.

When this is me.

Most startups fail

It's hard to measure precisely the rate of startup failure.

The number is high, but probably not quite as high as you think. Global investment firm Cambridge Associates tracked about 27,000 venture investments between 1990 and 2010 and found that the rate of startup failure (defined as companies that provide a 1X return or less to investors, though VCs typically want much higher returns than that) has not increased beyond 60% since 2001.

And according to the US Small Business Administration, about half of businesses with employees survive at least five years.

Yet a single startup's failure can have powerful ripple effects beyond the founder's personal disappointment. As Business Insider's Paige Leskin reported, Pitchbook data found that just 12 startups that failed in 2018 took $1.4 billion in venture-capital funding with them. That's because VCs have to bet widely, knowing that few if any of their portfolio companies will produce the desired return.

And depending on how far a startup has progressed, an entire team of people may lose their jobs.

Read more: The startup founder's guide to letting people go efficiently and compassionately

So, how do you prevent (or at least minimize the risk of) startup implosion? Business Insider spoke to several founders whose companies have failed, as well as investors and business professors. In exclusive interviews, they told us about the biggest factors affecting startup death.

Our sources include:

  • Henry Ward, founder and CEO of Carta, a platform for buying and selling shares in private companies. Ward previously founded Secondsight, a suite of investment tools that failed when he wasn't able to raise a seed round.
  • Brian Scordato, founder of Tacklebox Accelerator, a program for founders who haven't yet quit their day jobs. Scordato is also the founder of three other startups, including a dating app and a recruiting platform for college basketball, that are no longer operating.
  • Coleman Greene, founder of Sqord, a Techstars company that used technology to encourage kids to stay physically active. Sqord was purchased by Good Parents Inc/Kiddowear in 2019. Greene called this an "acquihire," an alternative to a wind-down that means the company was valuable for its team and not the actual product.
  • Sahil Lavingia, founder and CEO of Gumroad, an e-commerce platform for artists and creators. Lavingia bought back his company from most of his investors and is no longer venture-backed.
  • Daniel Ahmadizadeh, cofounder of Riley, a Y Combinator company that helped real-estate agents follow up with and maintain clients. Riley shut down in 2019.
  • Tristan Mace and Scott Howard, founders of retail tech company Margin, which shut down in 2019.
  • Patrick McGinnis, managing partner at the investment and advisory firm Dirigo Advisors.
  • Orla Byrne, lecturer in entrepreneurship and strategy at University College Dublin.
  • Ronald Mitchell, a professor of entrepreneurship at Texas Tech University.

Read on to learn about the most common causes of startup death — and how to avoid them.

The problem: Thinking you're the next Steve Jobs

Entrepreneurs have a tendency to be overly optimistic about their chances of success, research suggests. It's part of what keeps them going in the face of tremendous adversity — and part of what makes them attractive to VCs.

As Andreessen Horowitz managing partner Scott Kupor previously told Business Insider, he's actively looked for founders who were so confident in themselves they were willing to "walk through walls and do something that everybody has told them to their face is a waste of time or can never happen." 

Read more: The first-time founder's ultimate guide to pitching a VC

But this heightened sense of optimism and confidence can also work to entrepreneurs' detriment.

It goes back to Wasserman's observation: When founders hear about mistakes that other founders have made, they assume they'd never fall into a trap like that. And so they ignore valuable lessons that could save them time, money, and effort down the road. Or maybe save their business.

The experts' solution: Pay close attention to patterns in startup failures

A growing body of evidence suggests that you can learn to be a successful entrepreneur (or investor, for that matter) by studying patterns in the failures of other entrepreneurs.

For example, Mitchell, the Texas Tech professor, scoured the entrepreneurship literature and identified six key factors behind startup death: failure to innovate, create value, persist over time, make the utmost of scarcity, defend against people stealing your results, and remain flexible.

In a 2003 paper published in the Journal of Private Equity, Mitchell reports that when VCs applied a mathematical model using this six-attribute framework, the percentage of correct investment decisions was 65%, versus 52% when they relied on their own intuition. (In the context of this particular study, a correct investment decision meant backing a business that achieved profitability and still existed within five years.)

McGinnis' experience as an investor has showed him that many startup founders — secretly or not no secretly — see themselves as the next Steve Jobs. What they don't realize, McGinnis said, is that Jobs was more capable than the average entrepreneur.

So remember: Even if you learn from stories about Jobs, McGinnis said, "there's a bunch of things he never had to deal with that you probably will mess up."

The problem: Dismissing interpersonal issues as trivial

At the Founder Bootcamp, Wasserman suggested that people problems — i.e., issues within the founding team or between founders and investors — are the leading cause of startup failure. That's according to his own research on more than 6,000 startups and 16,000 founders since the year 2000, plus otherstudies he cited during the Bootcamp.

In particular, anyone starting a business with friends and family should know how risky it is.

As many as 55% of entrepreneurs in Wasserman's sample started companies with someone they knew. Yet Wasserman's research also suggests these partnerships tend to be the least stable founding teams. Partnerships between acquaintances or strangers (i.e., people you barely know), on the other hand, tend to be the most stable.

That's largely because friends and family often avoid important but tough business conversations (like splitting equity) for fear of damaging their personal relationships. When they finally do confront these issues, it's typically too late. Acquaintances, on the other hand, don't have to worry about damaging their bond because they don't currently have one.

The experts' solution: Understand and address people dynamics as early as possible

If you understand and address people issues early on, Wasserman said, you can prevent major problems as your company grows.

And if you're cofounding with friends and family, be sure to have those tough conversations before signing any contracts. Wasserman recommended planning for different scenarios in advance, and outlining those provisions in your equity ownership agreement.

For example, if one founder isn't able to contribute as much time or energy to the company as the other founders, they might lose a certain amount of equity in the business.

The problem: Blindly pursuing your passion

Sahil LavingiaPassion — defined as positive and intense feelings about something meaningful — helps an entrepreneur weather the inevitable low points in their career. But it can also work to their detriment. That's because passionate founders are more likely to make irrational business decisions.

Ward learned that lesson the hard way. Before Carta, he studied market finance and ran a failed finance company: a suite of investment tools called Secondsight.

In an email to Business Insider, Ward wrote: "Secondsight was built from my imagination and then presented to customers that I assumed would be interested. They weren't." That is to say, Ward's excitement about the idea led him to misjudge the market opportunity.

The experts' solution: Balance passion with preparation

Ward took a markedly different approach when building Carta.

"I embraced lean, iterative development, and even talked to customers before we wrote any code at all," Ward wrote. He continued to maintain a "tight feedback loop" with customers, to make sure the product was in fact something they would use.

Ward also took the time to learn about product development. He spent the first two years at Carta "really learning how to build product and surrounding myself with product-oriented people," including investors and early employees.

The problem: Not having enough experience

An entrepreneur may inspire people with their passion. But in order to successfully execute on an idea, they still need industry knowledge or experience.

McGinnis said he's seen plenty of entrepreneurs forge ahead with a "passion project" in an area where they have minimal expertise. Maybe they love food, so they open a restaurant. "But if you've never worked in the restaurant industry," McGinnis said, "your chances of success are far lower than they should be."

Sure, an industry outsider can sometimes bring in a much-needed fresh perspective. But McGinnis thinks that scenario is the exception, not the rule. In fact, a 2018 working paper by MIT researchers found that the most successful entrepreneurs are in their 40s, largely because they've built up enough relevant work experience.

Read more: The glitz of 'entrepreneurship porn' leads startup founders to make fatal business mistakes. Here's how to avoid them

The experts' solution: Leverage the knowledge and skills you already have

You don't necessarily have to wait until your 40s to start a company. The takeaway here is that your chances of success are higher if you know a lot about the area you're working in.

When Scordato selects founders for Tacklebox, his startup accelerator, he looks specifically for people who have developed deep domain expertise over the course of their career. He's especially impressed by founders who have some unique experience — for example, if you're one of the only finance professionals who has traded a specific derivative.

Read more: The ultimate guide to figuring out how (and if) you should start your own company

"You should have been subconsciously preparing to build this company for a long time," Scordato said in a previous interview with Business Insider, "in a way such that your skill sets and knowledge bases have already distanced you from any competition."

The problem: Getting attached to your hypotheses

Daniel Ahmadizadeh RileyAs a startup founder, you don't want to get overly attached to any particular business hypothesis.

Daniel Ahmadizadeh made that mistake at real-estate tech company Riley. In a letter to investors that he reproduced in a LinkedIn blog post, Ahmadizadeh said the company initially grew fast, but wasn't able to maintain customers. Riley would have done better to zero in on the sliver of real-estate agents who did stick with the product and figure out how to best serve them, Ahmadizadeh wrote.

Ahmadizadeh told Business Insider that too many founders get stuck on a hypothesis about what customers want and how they can best provide that. Even when their hypothesis is proved false, they stick with it.

The experts' solution: Take a scientific approach

Ahmadizadeh said early-stage founders should be running tons of experiments — and taking the results seriously. That might mean organizing focus groups to see whether your product is a bigger hit with, say, urban millennial dads or urban millennials without kids (or neither).

"What's most important is to get to a conclusion as quickly as possible," Ahmadizadeh said. "It's not really a positive or negative conclusion. It's just like a science project."

Scordato, the founder of Tacklebox, said the most successful founders look at the data, see what resonated, "and then focus very, very intently on that." You can think of it as a more extreme version of the Pareto Principle, or the idea that 20% of your efforts produce 80% of your results — so you'd be wise to focus on the 20% activities and ignore the rest.

The problem: Not being able to meet VCs' standards

Once you take money from investors, you're committing to meeting their expectations about the company's growth — specifically, that you'll return their money many times over. It's better to realize before you raise venture capital that this isn't the type of company you're building.

Lavingia came to this realization too late.

In a Medium post, Lavingia describes Gumroad's evolution: At 19 years old, he raised capital from top VCs and saw success with the e-commerce platform. But then growth stalled. His investors lost money.

Lavingia decided that, instead of shutting down the company entirely, he and his team would seek to become a profitable "lifestyle business," which can sustain itself without venture capital (and probably won't ever become a unicorn). He's since bought out the majority of his investors.

Today, Lavingia told Business Insider, Gumroad is hitting about $5 million in annual revenue and growing at a rate of about 40% per year — which is to say, it's still creating value for customers.

Riley, which raised $3.1 million in a seed round, also failed as a venture-capital investment, Ahmadizadeh said. It "ended up not being able to scale at the rate that is required to be venture-backed."

Ahmadizadeh made the decision to wind down Riley; in the letter to investors, he said he hoped to return 20% of their initial investments.

The experts' solution: Think carefully about raising venture money

Approaching your startup like a "business-school case," in Lavingia's words, can save you a lot of stress in the long run.

Specifically, Lavingia wishes he'd laid out a concrete business plan for Gumroad: "Within a year, within two years, within three years, these are the metrics that we need to hit in order to build a billion-dollar company." And just as importantly: "These are the ways that we're going to check each of these assumptions and make sure that it's true until we move onto the next step."

Had Lavingia taken these precautions, he might have realized he wasn't building a billion-dollar company — and might not have raised venture capital in the first place.

Ahmadizadeh also wishes he'd considered the downsides of raising venture capital.

Riley was "a very good small business, a profitable small business," he said. But because he'd raised millions in venture dollars, he couldn't, say, sell the company for $1 million when things got challenging. "It was all about growth, fast growth," Ahmadizadeh said, "but that's what we signed up for."

Read more: The ultimate guide to selling your startup for a boatload of cash, from founders who sold their startups for billions

The problem: Ignoring scary numbers

coleman greene sqordAccording to tech market intelligence platform CBInsights, the No. 1 cause of startup failure is not having a strong market need for the product or service. (That's based on 101 startup failure post-mortems by founders and investors.)

Oftentimes that's not because the founder didn't analyze the market; it's more because they chose to ignore what they saw.

Take it from Greene, who said that his experience at Sqord taught him the importance of being honest with yourself about the company's future.

Sqord raised a total of $5.2 million, then ran into trouble when they couldn't prove to investors that they'd built a sustainable enterprise model (i.e., selling their products to large companies). Ultimately, they sold the company to one of their customers in an acquihire, which is sometimes referred to as a "soft landing" for a struggling startup.  

The experts' solution: Be honest with yourself

Don't just look for "the metrics you're going to put in your next pitch deck," Greene said — i.e., the impressive stuff. "Make sure that you're really taking a deep look at all the good and the bad that's emerging from what you guys are building."

McGinnis, for his part, has seen far too many founders focusing on "vanity metrics," like their Instagram followings and press mentions. "Unless you're selling any products," McGinnis said, "it really doesn't matter."

Even founders who did put together a business plan start to "forget" how they defined success, McGinnis added. They "start re-forecasting if they fall behind."

That's partly because confronting reality can raise some uncomfortable questions. McGinnis offered an example: "If your goal was to create a $100 million business and now you find out that your business could only probably be a $5 million business, is it still worth it to you? And what should you do about that?"

What to do if you think your business is failing

Consider cutting your losses

As a startup scales, founders can fall prey to the sunk-cost fallacy, a term social scientists use to describe the tendency to stick with something just because you've already invested considerable resources in it. It's the classic case of "throwing good money after bad," like paying, yet again, to get an old, failing car repaired. Even if you know on a rational level that your company isn't working out, it's tempting to stay the course.

The story of Margin is a prime example of this phenomenon.

As cofounder Mace details in a blog post, Margin, the retail tech company, released its MVP just as credit-card companies started cutting card benefits. Margin then pivoted to an email-alias product, but by that time they didn't have the resources to sustain the company, and they shut it down.

Even though Mace and cofounder Scott Howard could see initial signs that the card-services industry was going to implode, they kept trying to make their product a hit.

"At the time, we were convinced that partnering with industry players was the best path for the company's success," Mace and Howard wrote in an email to Business Insider, referring to their partnerships with people like the former CEO of Saks Fifth Avenue and the cofounder of Gilt Groupe. "The reality is that partnerships with the world's biggest financial companies takes lots of time — time that startups don't have — and we failed to suspend that disbelief with ourselves."

A second fundraising round fell apart, Mace wrote in the blog post, and Margin didn't have enough capital to survive.

Get outside counsel

Byrne, the University College Dublin lecturer, helped explain why founders have a hard time being objective about their business: "You've invested so much to get this baby established, up off the ground, and grown." When you see market data that doesn't line up with your vision for the company, it can be hard to reconcile the two.

What's more, most companies go through rough patches and pull through. It can be difficult to know, Byrne said, "whether something just requires resilience, versus pulling the plug."

Still, Byrne added, "Every entrepreneur I've spoken to has said they regretted not making the decision to close their business sooner."

One way to avoid this mess is to get impartial advice. Byrne recommended looking for someone who "understands business thoroughly" and is as objective as possible when it comes to your startup's fate. Where you might find it difficult to honestly assess your company's progress, that person might say, "Look, this is what's really happening here."

Keep the interests of  your employees, investors, and customers in mind

As much as your startup is your baby, you're not the only person with a vested interest in seeing the company succeed. Keep in mind that your employees, your customers, and your investors (if you have them) will also be hurt by the company's failure.

McGinnis has seen too many founders forget this part. If you're having trouble raising additional capital or you're running out of money, you must plan for your company's failure.

"Don't just run it to the point where you have no money left, because then you can't wind down the company appropriately because you won't have the money to do so," McGinnis said. Specifically, you won't be able to offer your employees' severance pay. "Always have a cushion of capital there to unwind the company."

Lavingia said he had his customers' best interests in mind when he declined to shut down Gumroad entirely. He imagined telling his customers he was shutting down because he wasn't able to fulfill his dream of building a billion-dollar company — even though the company was profitable and customers were making money. And he imagined those customers outraged, saying, "What the hell?"

You might also consider returning your investors' money if things aren't working out — something that McGinnis has seen happen just twice in his career.

McGinnis said leaving everyone in the lurch is generally a bad look; it "reflects poorly upon your investors and the other people that are part of your company."

But there's also a practical reason not to act selfishly: You might start another company some day. "If you screw people over," McGinnis said, "you inhibit your chances of getting those same people to work with you in the future."

SEE ALSO: Founders and investors reveal the ultimate guide to scaling a startup — and common pitfalls to avoid

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Stewart Butterfield, co-founder of Slack and Flickr, says 2 beliefs have brought him the greatest success in life

My husband and I are both freelancers with unpredictable incomes. Two years ago, we moved to an island off the coast of Seattle — here's what a week of our typical spending looks like.

$
0
0

M&S from engagement shoot.JPG

  • Shannon Page and her husband are both full-time freelancers. That means their yearly income is pretty unpredictable.
  • They live on Orcas Island in Washington — they have a small mortgage, and covered their first three years of payments with their savings.
  • Below, Shannon shares how they spent their money in a week that included an out-of-town visitor, car repairs, and some overdue taxes.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

My husband and I are freelancers: I'm a 52-year-old writer, editor, and proofreader; Mark is a 62-year-old illustrator and writer. We had a financially stable life — a paid-for house, gym memberships, enough income to pay our bills — in Portland, Oregon. But the Rose City is being loved to death. Tens of thousands of people a year are being drawn there by the nice climate, the foodie culture, the great music, the Portlandia vibe. The city we knew is vanishing. Escalating crime, gridlock, road rage and constant construction left us feeling embattled in our own house.

Happily, working at home for remote clients means we can live anywhere that has a decent internet connection. So, two years ago, we followed a long-standing dream and bought a lovely house with five acres (and a pond!) on Orcas Island, Washington. This meant a small mortgage, and because our income is unpredictable, we immediately put enough of our Portland house proceeds into a savings account to cover our first three years of payments.

Our "typical" monthly "budget" is always difficult to define. Working at home for dozens of clients means no two days — or jobs — are alike. Work floods in all at once, or not at all for months. So both income and expenditures are wildly unpredictable. Last year we grossed only $41,000 — that's not a typo. This year, we had surpassed that by the end of June, and are now on target for around $80,000.

Unless something unexpected happens! (Insert evil laughter from offstage.)

Speaking of which, this year we've had a few medical issues, and are already out of pocket $4,000 not covered by our health insurance. Then Mark's main computer died, and his backup computer, and then his Cyntiq drawing computer. Then a printer — all within three months. And then we got our tax bill.

Hoping to shield ourselves from some of this chaos, we became an S Corporation in May, incurring lawyer and accountant fees — planned expenses, for once. We're hoping this will help with our taxes next year. Fingers crossed.

Our "average" monthly spending looks like this:

  • Mortgage (principal, interest, escrow for property taxes & home insurance): $1,737
  • Business expenses: $1,575
  • Income & self-employment taxes: $1,090
  • Groceries: $800
  • Travel/entertainment/dining out/clothing/gym/books/gifts/charity/haircuts/household necessities/etc.: $700
  • Medical: $575
  • Utilities (including firewood, our sole winter heat): $430
  • Insurance (auto, life, umbrella, medical, emergency airlift): $385
  • Garden: $220
  • Legal & accounting fees: $200
  • Auto (gas, maintenance, ferry fees): $120

Total $7,832

With our projected average income of $6,667/month, you can see that these numbers don't exactly pencil out.

Fortunately, we do have two years of mortgage money left in that savings account. But we're barely treading water here. And the Pacific Northwest is expensive; island living is costlier still. Gas is $4 a gallon here; asparagus can be $9 a pound. Ferry fees are $56.55 per car.

Choosing adventurous living over the path of least resistance is challenging. Here's what we spent during a recent week, July 24 to July 30.

SEE ALSO: I loved my life as a trophy wife until I realized what I was giving up. So I made the terrifying choice to blow up my marriage — and it was worth it.

Wednesday, July 24 total: $37.14

Yesterday, just as a houseguest arrived from the high Arctic, we called pest control to deal with a huge wasp nest in our living room ceiling, and the rats on our bird feeders. (Ah, bucolic rural life.) 

Mark went to the hardware store for rat traps ($7.33), and to the grocery store for steaks, cantaloupe, Rainier cherries, nectarines, bread, mushrooms, and $0.50 of grocery bags ($29.81). I wrangled the barbecue and a bottle of wine while our visiting friend E. regaled us with tales of polar bears and the never-setting sun. Her island adventure makes ours look tame.



Thursday total: $32.92

Orcas Island doesn't have any big-box or chain stores. You go to "America" for that, as locals call the mainland, and Amazon Prime is our great friend. We're learning how to do more for ourselves, like canning our own fruit, pickles and preserves, making our own liqueurs and pastries — and routine auto maintenance. After several months of unanswered messages left with the island's overbooked auto repair shop, I finally gave up and ordered new wiper blades for my Miata ($20.62). (Prime "overnight" shipping here means Thursday-to-Tuesday, by the way.)

We're good cooks who don't eat out much — avoiding calories and poverty both. But that evening, E. treated us to an amazing dinner at The Loft ($0.00, for us). Afterward, we drove to West Beach to watch the sunset, a rare event in the high Arctic. I bought a glass of wine ($8.30). Mark bought an ice cream cone ($4). E. took photos to show friends back home what sunset looks like.



Friday total: $235.36

While E. and I hiked up Turtleback Mountain, Mark stayed home and fought with his website provider about why his third serial episode this month violated his plan's five-mailings-per-month limit. Their solution? Upgrade to a 20-mailings-per-month plan ($136.54) to send out that third episode. (New math?) 

After our hike, E. and I had ice cream ($7.57), and brought some home to cheer Mark up ($3.78).

Later, we drove E. to the island's tiny airport and put her on a tiny plane, then took ourselves to dinner at The Kitchen ($50.47). Next we bought Mark some vitamin E oil at the pharmacy. He tried to cut his index finger off with a cheese grater a few weeks ago. Seven stitches. E oil's supposed to help that. Then we saw a movie, "Toy Story 4, ($28.00)" where I also bought a glass of wine ($9).



Saturday total: $27.85

Some good friends were moving stuff out of their just-sold bed and breakfast. We brought our truck to lend a hand, and they bought lunch at the Lower Tavern ($0.00, for us). This was not a weight-loss week. 

Then back to the grocery store for a few essentials — ice cream, tomatoes, broccoli ($27.85).

After that, we went home and worked (there is no such word as "weekend" in freelancer-land) until dinner — at home, for once — before watching "Good Omens" on Amazon Prime. We don't have — or want — cable or satellite TV, but we do splurge on Netflix as well.



Sunday total: $19.26

Our friends are still running their just-sold B&B through the end of the month, and they've hired me to clean and remake rooms for a few days — as freelance editors do from time to time. When I got home from turning beds and scrubbing toilets, I placed another Amazon Prime order, for body lotion ($19.26), and worked all afternoon until dinner — at home again!



Monday total: $219.12

I went online and paid the final installment, interest, and penalties of our payment plan to the IRS for that overdue 2018 tax surprise ($1,082.37). It feels good to have this paid off! Now to start on this year's taxes …

Mark ordered some desperately needed tulip bulbs online ($46.16), and I paid the pest control bill ($172.96, which included the $50 setup + $110 quarterly fee + tax).

Then — you guessed it — we worked all day and had dinner at home.



Tuesday total: $113.05

We have an out-of-state friend who lives on government assistance and barely scrapes by, so every month we put some money ($40) in an account he can access. After doing that at the bank, Mark went to the grocery store for milk, half and half, grapefruit juice, artichoke hearts, breakfast cereal, more amazing Rainier cherries, blueberries, Galia melon, a mango, and some lettuce, plus a $0.25 bag because we keep forgetting to put that dang canvas tote in the car ($49.00).

My wiper blades arrived; I haven't worked out how to put them on my car yet. I'm almost certain it'll be easy-peasy, and I won't regret trying to do it myself. Almost …

We walked back down to West Beach to enjoy another sunset over a dinner of hot dogs, a glass of wine, and a Lopez Ice Cream milkshake ($24.05), and called my dad and stepmom to wish her a happy birthday. Then we walked back home, 30 minutes up the hill, and excellent exercise!


We love our island life. Its high cost of living and sparse amenities are a small price to pay for such inspiring peace and beauty every day. Our home is a serene oasis (even accounting for wasps, rats, ravenous deer, raccoons herons, owls, and river otters … ) in which to create and live. We will figure out how to get our finances on a more stable basis; we have several layers of plans. Mark's serial is building an audience, and my writing — both fiction and nonfiction— is gaining traction as well. In addition, my editing business is booming, and my biggest client just decided to raise their freelancer rates by 25% — without my even asking for it!

The world might be scary and so many things are uncertain, but I think we're going to be all right.

At least we're where we most want to be. And we have each other. 

Shannon Page is an author and editor on Orcas Island who has published dozens of short stories. Novels include "Our Lady of the Islands" (with Jay Lake), a Publishers Weekly Best Book of 2014; "Eel River"; "The Queen and The Tower," and (with Karen Berry) "Orcas Intrigue" and "Orcas Intruder."



Cannabis-related job searches have skyrocketed over 650% in the past 3 years. Here's who's hiring and what skills you need to get in.

$
0
0

MedMen

  • Cannabis-related job postings in the US have quadrupled in the past three years as more states legalize the drug, according to a new report from the job site Indeed.
  • During the same time period, cannabis-related job searches increased 650%, indicated a huge demand for jobs in the brand new industry.
  • See below for a list of who's hiring, and sign up for our new cannabis newsletter, Cultivated

Cannabis legalization is spreading around the US and job-seekers are highly interested in the brand-new industry, according to a new report from the employment-search firm Indeed.

Since 2016, cannabis-related job searches have skyrocketed 650%, according to Indeed economist Andrew Flowers. Over the same time period, the number of cannabis-related job postings has quadrupled, from 231 per million in May 2016 to 915 per million in May 2019.

"There are very few industries have seen a seven-fold increase in job seeker searches in three years," Flowers said in an interview. "Very few." 

Read more: From a master's in medical cannabis to a minor in weed, these are the college programs growing the next crop of marijuana entrepreneurs

In the past year alone, cannabis-related job postings have increased by 90%, according to Flowers. And if you want to land a gig in the booming industry, your best bet is probably in sales and retail.

The most common cannabis job posting on Indeed is for "budtender," which is a person who works at a dispensary and helps customers navigate the plethora of pot products. Coming in at number two is "sales associate" followed by "sales representative."

The top cannabis employers in the US in 2019

The second basket of popular cannabis jobs is all around the growing and cultivating of the crop itself, for positions like "grower," "trimmer," and "agriculture technician." And third, medical cannabis companies are hiring pharmacists and physicians to help research cannabis-based drugs and diagnose patients.

This year, Harvest has the most job openings among US cannabis companies, followed by Smoker's Choice, and Cresco Labs. On the cannabis-tech side, Weedmaps is hiring lots of data scientists and software engineers.

A quick scan of Harvest's job board shows hiring across divisions include sales, marketing, retail, and legal, meaning there is lots of opportunity for those with different skill sets to jump into the cannabis industry.

Cannabis is legal for adult use in 11 states and medically legal in 33 states. Illinois became the latest state to legalize earlier this year.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The US women's national team dominates soccer, but here's why the US men's team sucks

From Bill Clinton to Julius Caesar, here are 12 world leaders who were left-handed

$
0
0

bill clinton lefty

  • August 13 is International Lefthanders Day.
  • Just 10% of people in the world are left-handed, though many of them occupy high offices.
  • Scroll down to see 11 left-handed world leaders — from Benjamin Netanyahu to Barack Obama to Simon Bolivar, the military general who liberated South America.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Though left-handers make up just 10% of the world, many of them have very important jobs.

A surprising number of US presidents, in particular, are left-handers— George HW Bush, Ronald Reagan, and Barack Obama are just three of the lefties to have occupied the Oval Office.

According to some research, lefties may be more creative, be better at "divergent thinking" — generating new ideas based on existing information — and face challenges better.

Read more:Scientists say left-handed people may be smarter in one key way

Scroll down to see 11 of the world's left-handed leaders.

When former US President Barack Obama signed his first executive order in 2009, he said: "That's right, I'm a lefty, get used to it."

Source:Business Insider



Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is a lefty.



Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta is also one of many left-handed world leaders. Kenyatta, the son of Kenya's first ever president, has led the country since 2013.

Read more:Scientists think they have found the reason some people are left-handed — and it has nothing to do with the brain



Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who has occupied his office since 2004, also writes with his left hand.



Prince William — seen here in 2015 — is a left-handed royal.

Read more:5 ways being left-handed can positively affect your life



Former UK Prime Minister David Cameron is seen here in Jakarta signing a guest book with his left hand.



Bill Clinton was the third consecutive US president who writes with his left hand.



Here's his predecessor, George HW Bush...



... and his predecessor, Ronald Reagan.

Reagan was born left-handed, but his schoolteachers forced him to learn right-handed writing.

Many former US presidents were also lefties. They include James Garfield, Herbert Hoover, Harry Truman, and Gerald Ford.

Read more:8 presidents you had no idea were left-handed



Winston Churchill, Britain's wartime prime minister, was another famous leftie.



Though there (obviously) isn't photographic evidence to prove it, multiple historical documents have recorded Roman Empire ruler Julius Caesar to be left-handed.



Statues and paintings also depict Simon Bolivar, the military leader who liberated Latin America from Spain, holding his sword or documents in his left hand.



Elon Musk just endorsed a presidential candidate few people have heard of because he wants to give everyone in the US $1,000 per month for free. Here's what basic income is and how Andrew Yang's plan to solve America's wealth-gap crisis would work.

$
0
0

Andrew Yang

  • Elon Musk has endorsed serial entrepreneur Andrew Yang's run for Democratic presidential candidate, mostly based on the latter's supper of universal basic income (UBI).
  • UBI is at the center of Yang's platform. It promises a set of guaranteed payments of $1,000 per month, or $12,000 per year, to all US citizens over the age of 18.
  • The ideas behind UBI are centuries old, but they've been gaining traction within the Democratic field thanks to the support of candidates like Yang.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Over the weekend, Elon Musk shared his support for a Democratic presidential candidate — the serial entrepreneur Andrew Yang — and a radical social policy initiative, universal basic income (or UBI).

In a series of brief tweets, Musk said that he supported Yang, who previously founded Venture for America, and that UBI is "obviously needed." 

UBI is at the center of Yang's platform, and, indeed, the motivating force behind it. As his campaign website declares

Andrew Yang is running for President as Democrat in 2020 to implement the Freedom Dividend.

This form of UBI that he is proposing for the United States is a set of guaranteed payments of $1,000 per month, or $12,000 per year, to all U.S. citizens over the age of 18. Yes, that means you and everyone you know would get another $1,000/month every month from the U.S. government, no questions asked.

It's fair to say that Yang's candidacy provides the most public advocacy for UBI in America to date. Under his plan, every adult gets the 12 grand a year, regardless the cost of living associated with where they are in the country. It would stack with Social Security. He promises that it would be paid for through "consolidating" select welfare programs and implementing a value added tax, or VAT, which is part of why the rich, as well as the poor, would receive the monthly funding.

Yang's idea has a long history — and promising recent results. 

An old idea gets newfound interest

UBI is gaining newfound interest, but the system itself stretches back to the 16th century, when Spanish-born humanist Juan Luis Vives praised a system of unconditional welfare. "Even those who have dissipated their fortunes in dissolute living — through gaming, harlots, excessive luxury, gluttony and gambling — should be given food, for no one should die of hunger," Vives wrote in 1526.

Over the next few centuries, political scientists and sociologists honed the idea of a minimum income even further. In 1797, the American revolutionary Thomas Paine advocated for a "national fund" in the pamphlet "Agrarian Justice,"  for which every American would be awarded fifteen pounds sterling when they turned 21, with another ten pounds per year after age 50. 

Even Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. declared his support for basic income at a Stanford lecture in 1967.

"It seems to me the Civil Rights Movement must now begin to organize for the guaranteed annual income and mobilize forces," King said, "so we can bring to the attention of our nation this need ... which I believe will go a long, long way toward dealing with the Negroes' economic problem and the economic problem many other poor people confront in our nation."

In his final book, Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community?, King observed that "no matter how dynamically the economy develops and expands it does not eliminate all poverty." Hence the need for the nation to create full employment — or create incomes. 

martin luther king jr

A big experiment, briefly lost to history

The decade between 1969 and 1979 marked a crucial turning point in the basic income movement for two reasons.

The first was President Richard Nixon's 1969 proposal of the "Family Assistance Plan." The legislation promised to give an additional $10,400 (in 2016 dollars) each year to families who had kids, depending on income. While the FAP easily made it through the House of Representatives, it ultimately died in the Senate.

The second was the "Mincome Program" that took place in Manitoba, Canada. Between 1974 and 1979, residents in the city of Winnipeg and smaller nearby town of Dauphin received additional monthly income, again based on their income levels.

Spondoolicks money cashIt wasn't until University of Manitoba economist Evelyn Forget discovered the Mincome files 20 years later that anyone realized what a success the program had been.

Forget's research showed hospitalization rates fell by 8.5%, high school completion rates went up, and new mothers could afford to work less. And in general, few people stopped working — one of the key fears that's often cited about basic income.

By nearly all measures, the conclusion was clear: Basic income held serious potential as a way to lift people out of poverty.

A radical idea tiptoes toward the mainstream

Forget's research was critical because it helped revive the basic income movement after two decades of dormancy. Advocates had been praising the concept all the while, but only within the last decade have mainstream economists considered putting it back into action.

Some of the biggest names in business, particularly the tech world, have endorsed UBI, including Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, and Richard Branson.

In over a dozen countries and many more cities around the world, academics and policymakers have launched basic income experiments of their own — some completed, some ongoing. Many of the projects have already replicated the effects Forget found in the late 1970s. Much of the contemporary research on UBI and related programs has been carried out in the developing world; the World Bank largely found that the global poor spend the money on household goods, health care, and that various costs that come with schooling. 

As has been observedelsewhere, the biggest issue with basic income is that it still needs more large-scale, years-long empirical study in developed countries to figure out where or not it "works." Given that UBI remains something of a political Rorschach test — the term "government handout" remains a lightning rod in 2019 — it needs more to be more tested than debated. With the right studies ran, the policy could be based on evidence, rather than argument.

That's why Yang's campaign, and the Freedom Dividend its wrapped around, doesn't fail if the technologist doesn't end up in the White House. As UBI becomes more mainstream, it stands a stronger chance of being better researched — and ending up as viable policy.

SEE ALSO: 9 ways student debt is one more thing that's worse for women than men

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: MALCOLM GLADWELL: ‘Anyone who gives a single dollar to Princeton has completely lost their mind'


IBM is using its AI star Watson to pinpoint salaries and coach employees. Here are 9 robot tools that could one day find their way to your office.

$
0
0

ibm watson ginni rometty

IBM has survived for more than a century by evolving through major technological shifts, and in 2014, it found itself at the beginning of yet another one. Changes in cloud computing (where services are accessed remotely online rather than through internal hardware), artificial intelligence, and the digital-ledger system blockchain forced the tech giant to modify significant portions of its business.

Over the following five years, IBM weathered a decline in profits as it invested in new sectors, forcing it to let go of thousands of its 350,000 employees worldwide. But while CEO Ginni Rometty knew that overcoming those challenges would sometimes be painful, she and human-resources chief Diane Gherson developed a new approach to lessen the damage and increase long-term value.

IBM would become a "skills-based organization" — that is, employees would now be assessed primarily by their collection of skills, allowing them more flexibility in a rapidly changing environment. And AI, which was partially responsible for this sudden and drastic shift, was going to help the company adapt.

Over the past five years, IBM has developed a suite of AI-powered tools that help recruit, map career paths, and even determine salaries. IBM is not only selling some of these programs to other businesses, it's also leading the way in discovering what's possible. Because of its influence, the programs below could find their way to your office in one form or another.

Skills inference

IBM employees used to have to answer long surveys about their skill sets, then go over them with their boss. Now this data is collected by AI, giving teams more time to focus on the discussions rather than the paperwork. IBM estimates that the accuracy of its skills assessor is between 85% and 95%.

Blue Matching

It analyzes the aforementioned skill sets for employees and weighs them against requirements for other roles within the company. Blue Matching then alerts the employee about those particular roles.

Watson Career Coach

ibm career coach myca

IBM released in 2016 a consumer version of Watson, the question-answering AI that famously made its public debut as a "Jeopardy!" contestant. Besides answering trivia questions, this technology also assists IBMers. Employees can ask Career Coach questions about their role and skills, and the program can be used in tandem with Blue Matching to map out a career path. 

Compensation Advisor with Watson

ibm compensation advisor

This tool sorts through historical data on thousands of IBM employees and those of competitors to present a salary range managers can work with, saving time and reducing the scope of judgment required. These are not mandates; rather, they are intended as data-based guidelines.

Read more:AI is going to change your career. IBM is showing how that can be a good thing.

Your Learning

ibm your learning

This personalized hub of online classes allows employees to acquire new skills, from project management to cybersecurity basics, and then prove their newfound expertise to their managers. All lessons are available outside working hours, but depending on training schedules, time can be allotted during the workday to complete them.

Cognitive Talent Insights

cognitive talent ibm

This tool keeps managers automatically updated with their employees' progress and interprets this data to make suggestions, such as considering an employee for a promotion in the near future or stepping in to assist an employee in danger of missing a quota.

Application filtering

Watson helps job candidates by answering questions related to a role to ensure they're a good fit, and it helps managers by filtering through the first batch of applicants to determine who has sufficient skills.

Engage at IBM

IBM has an internal social-media network that allows employees to publicly discuss a variety of topics, and Engage at IBM assesses it (and not external social-media sites like Facebook or Twitter) to determine top talking points for the day.

Chat bots

Finally, multiple chat bots are used for specialized needs, such as the job-application process or benefits enrollment.

IBM has determined through quarterly assessments of financial and performance impacts that each of these tools is worthy of being further developed, and told us there are new ones in development. They're more than just a fad —the company found that the AI suite saved the HR department $107 million and "thousands of hours" in 2017.

SEE ALSO: AI is going to change your career. IBM is showing how that can be a good thing.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Reddit cofounder Alexis Ohanian on robots taking over jobs: 'There is no way a robot is replacing my barber'

Stanford researchers found evidence that racial bias against venture-capital funds led by people of color increases the better the funds perform

$
0
0

daryn dodson

  • A study from Stanford University that was released on Monday found evidence of racial bias against venture-capital funds led by people of color.
  • The study, which was conducted by the Stanford psychology professor Jennifer Eberhardt in partnership with Illumen Capital, found that professional investors rated venture-investing teams led by white men more favorably than firms led by black professionals, with all other credentials remaining the same.
  • Illumen Capital founder and managing partner Daryn Dodson told Business Insider that the findings "helped put into context" his daily experience running a private venture-capital firm focused on reducing bias in investing.
  • Eberhardt told Business Insider that while the study didn't look into the cause of bias, she was eager to continue exploring the possibilities to help the venture-capital industry become more representative.
  • Click here for more BI Prime stories.

As the venture-capital industry continues to pursue diversity and inclusion initiatives, a new study from Stanford University highlights the uphill battle many black-led firms still face.

The study, out Monday, found that professional investors rated venture-investing teams led by white men more favorably than firms led by black professionals, with all other credentials remaining the same.

"Asset allocators manage a lot of money," the Stanford psychology professor and study author Jennifer Eberhardt told Business Insider. "Only 1.3% of assets are actually managed by women and people of color, so you have this hugely powerful industry that's virtually all white and male, and we were interested in why that was."

Read more:Startups with women founders are on track to see record venture investment in 2019

For the study, Eberhardt partnered with Illumen Capital, a venture-capital firm based in Oakland, California, that hopes to reduce implicit bias in investing.

The study asked 180 asset allocators, otherwise known as limited partners or professional investors, to evaluate four different venture-capital firms for potential investment. The firms were broken out into white-led and black-led categories, then were either designated as high-performing or low-performing. 

Potential investors were asked to rate the firm's overall performance, investment skills, competency, social fit, and their expectations of how much the fund could raise. They were also asked how likely they were to take a meeting with the team and begin the investment process — all based on a one-page summary of the firm's credentials and performance. 

"We found that there was evidence for racial bias when you look at the teams that were most qualified," Eberhardt said. "Even though people were looking at the same teams, black teams were perceived much more negatively, all other things held identical. It showed us that this is not just a pipeline problem because these highly qualified black-led teams suffer. And in fact, the more qualified the black-led teams were, the more bias they faced."

The opposite was true for weaker teams, the study found, with more professional investors favoring the black-led teams. But they were still hesitant to invest.

"It helped to put into context my daily experience," Illumen Capital founder and managing partner Daryn Dodson told Business Insider. "The fact that people would reduce the set of possible investments at the top to most competitive firms was a pretty striking finding in that people seemed to have an inability to see value when race is present in the decision making process."

The study was initiated to confirm the existence of racial bias in venture investing, Eberhardt said, so it didn't look at the potential reasons behind the professional investors' decisions to back white-led teams over black-led teams. But the study's findings push back on the widely held belief that the industry is subject to a so-called pipeline problem, which ascribes the underrepresentation of minorities in the tech-investing industry to a lack of candidates with the requisite qualifications. 

"I think investors need to become aware that this exists, and we have empirical evidence now that this exists," Dodson said. "This is just the first step. We are identifying and clearly stating that this is just not a pipeline problem. If you only try to solve the pipeline problem, that isn't going to be enough. It's a condition we cannot solve."

Eberhardt is eager to expand on the study's findings to see whether racial bias is present across different fundraising stages for firms, or if the presence of diversity traininghas any influence on professional investors' decisions. 

"I didn't really even know that much about the world of investing before Daryn contacted me," Eberhardt said. "Most people don't really know how investment markets work, and it was all blind to me until I got involved in this, and it's been a real eye-opener."

SEE ALSO: There's a boom in VC funding for fertility startups. But female founders say they still have a hard time getting men to invest.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Jeff Bezos is worth over $160 billion — here's how the world's richest man makes and spends his money

Forget retirement: Senior citizens are founding small businesses, and research shows more of them are likely to succeed than young entrepreneurs

$
0
0

older woman daughter

  • For some seniors, retirement is an opportunity to learn how to use computers and start their own small business — and they're doing it at New York's Senior Planet.
  • The MIT Technology Review got a glimpse of Senior Planet, a community center and coworking space that hosts classes on everything from using computer programs like Google Hangouts to opening online shops on Etsy.
  • Senior citizens are becoming an important part of the labor force — according to the US Department of Labor, Americans over 55 will be the largest group of workers by 2024.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Some senior citizens move to retirement communities where they play golf or shuffleboard. Other seniors looking to be tech-savvy or start a small business go to Senior Planet.

The MIT Technology Review recently went inside Senior Planet, a retirement community and coworking space founded by Tom Kamber in 2006. At their Manhattan location, seniors can learn everything from finding the "on" button on their computers to creating their own websites. Learning these skills has never been more important for older people, especially as senior entrepreneurs are becoming a bigger part of America's economy.

One regular at Senior Planet, Michael Taylor, used to run an antiques store, but had no choice but to close up shop amid rising rent costs. Despite losing his small business, he had little desire to retire. Instead, he got his master's degree at New York School of Interior Design. As he said in the MIT Technology Review's article, he started going to Senior Planet to get help with website design for an already successful small business.

The research finds that older business owners are more successful — and that continuing to work actually helps mental health.

According to Babson College's 2016 State of Small Business in America report, 51% of small businesses are run by people aged 50 or over, up from 46% in 2007. And those small business are staying open longer than ones founded by younger generations: 70% of senior-run small businesses are still running three years after opening, compared to only 28% of businesses run by younger entrepreneurs.

There are also more senior citizens than ever. Millennials may be the largest group in the labor force at the moment, but older Americans are catching up. According to the US Department of Labor, workers over 55 will be the largest group, at 24.8%, by 2024.

Taylor, now 71 years 0ld, had seen his father retire at age 84. Suddenly having no work aged his father quickly, he told MIT Technology Review. "And I'm like, 'If that's what retirement does for you, I don't want it.' So I plan on working until God calls me home or just until I can't work any longer," he's quoted as saying within the article.

Some experts say that the best way to stay active and prevent the ill effects of aging is to never retire. According to a 2013 study by the Institute of Economic Affairs, a UK think tank, retirees were 40% more likely to be diagnosed with clinical depression than seniors who put off retirement, which indicates that work is good for mental health in old age. 

Entrepreneurship helps combat ageism, too. 

While many older Americans are still in the workforce, ageism is keeping them from landing jobs. According to a study by job site iHire, 53% of baby boomers have felt age discrimination at work, including having trouble getting jobs they're qualified for.

Taylor has experienced ageism firsthand. "I found getting a job is not that easy if you're not the 20, 30, or mid-40s candidates," he said in the article.

Senior Planet's goal is make ageism a thing of the past by erasing stereotypes of elderly people who can't use technology or learn new things. Senior Planet founder Tom Kamber told MIT Technology Review that aging does anything but slow you down. In fact, "your horizon is shorter — your dreams become more critical and urgent," he says.

Kamber believes that age is not a barrier to entrepreneurship or success, but occasionally, technology is. "When you're a senior, and you've got an idea, and you want to make it happen," he said, "somebody's got to help out a little bit."

SEE ALSO: Down with '30 Under 30': How the myth of the young founder is completely misguided — and leading to Silicon Valley lies

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Seniors told us the one thing they would like to tell young people — and their answers were mind-blowing

Here are the 5 biggest questions facing WeWork as it prepares for its IPO (UBER, LYFT, CBRE, WORK)

$
0
0

adam neumann wework

  • WeWork is preparing for an initial public offering and is expected to make public its IPO paperwork as soon as next week.
  • The company has been valued like a tech company by private investors.
  • But it faces numerous questions and concerns as it gears up for its offering.
  • Among them are whether it really should be put in the same class as tech companies and how its business would fare in a recession.
  • Click here for more BI Prime stories.

WeWork is gearing up for a big public offering.

But as it does so, it's facing some similarly big questions that could dampen investors' enthusiasm for its shares, limit the amount of money it raises in the initial public offering, and dog its stock on into the future.

The coworking business, which now calls itself The We Company, will reportedly make public its IPO documents as soon as next week. It is the most valuable startup to head for the public markets since Uber earlier this year.

Read this: WeWork's IPO filing will reportedly be revealed as soon as next week, giving us our best look yet at its business

With a $47 billion valuation, it has been treated like a tech company. And in some ways it has performed like one. It has expanded rapidly and more than doubled its sales last year while also doubling its loss.

But it's also been dogged by consistent concerns about its business model and about its CEO and founder, Adam Neumann. Some of those questions may be answered by its IPO paperwork. Answers for others won't be known for months or even years after its debut on the public markets.

As the company prepares for its IPO, here as some of the biggest questions it faces:

SEE ALSO: WeWork has raised $6.1 billion and pioneered the coworking movement — but it increasingly looks like it doesn't understand commercial real estate

Just what is WeWork?

Adam Neumann describes what The We Company is doing as a "global physical platform." But he's been investing heavily in technology and has bought a succession of software startups in recent years. The company has also argued that it has been generating and will continue to generate valuable data about its clients over the years and how they use its space and that the data could be offered as its own service or could form its own future products and services.

But many see We as just a real-estate company. Nearly all its revenue comes from memberships, or essentially the rent payments made by its tenants. It's also likely that most of its investments are going toward leases on properties and furnishings for those properties.

The answer to the question about whether it's more a tech company or a real-estate firm is important because it could have a direct bearing on its valuation — and how much public investors will pay for its stock.

Neumann has been able to convince venture investors, including SoftBank, that We is deserving of a valuation akin to that of a tech company. With a valuation of about $47 billion based on its last funding round, The We Company is worth more than 15 times its expected revenue this year.

By contrast, real-estate companies are generally not valued so highly. CBRE Group, for example, has a market capitalization of $18.4 billion, or less than half We's. But the company posted $21 billion in sales last year — more than 10 times the startup's — and it was profitable to the tune of $1 billion. Boston Properties, which is considered overvalued, generated about 50% more revenue than We last year, but its market capitalization is less than half that of Neumann's company.

Whether We is a technology company or a real-estate one is "the biggest fundamental question that people seem to be asking," said Robert Siegel, a lecturer in management at Stanford Graduate School of Business. He continued: "The jury is still out on that."



What happens in a recession?

There are good reasons to worry about what might happen to The We Company when the next economic downturn hits.

The company was formed in 2010, after the economy was already starting to rebound from the Great Recession. So it has never experienced a downturn in the US, its largest market, or in many of the other markets it serves, and there's no way to now how it will weather one.

But Regus, which pioneered the coworking market, offers a cautionary tale. It saw a booming market during the 1990s, a prior tech-led boom. But when that market went bust, it saw a sharp downturn in its fortunes and ended up filing for bankruptcy.

The concerns about We center on its business model. It rents space on long-term leases and then turns around and, essentially, sublets the space to other companies on short-term, often month-to-months, deals. If the economy enters recession, many of We's startup customers could go out of business and many of its growing number of enterprise customers could sharply cut back on their office space. Because the companies' deals with We are most likely shorter term than their traditional leases, the startup could bear the brunt of their cutbacks.

"It has not been battle-tested, and it's sitting right in one of the most cyclical sectors of the economy that we have," said Tom Smith, a cofounder of Truss, an online commercial real-estate marketplace. How it will endure a downturn, he continued, is "the many-billion-dollar question."

In an interview with Business Insider earlier this year, Neumann argued that the startup would be well positioned in a downturn. It offers competitive rents that could be attractive to companies looking to cut costs. A growing portion of its customers are enterprise companies, and they're staying in its spaces for longer periods. And it could benefit from a downturn by getting lower prices on leases and seeing less costly construction costs for finishing out its spaces, he said.

Plus, the company has already experienced — and survived — downturns in Brazil, Argentina, and China, he said.

"We have proven in markets where it has occurred already," Neumann said in the interview of recession. "We're stronger while [a downturn] happens and come out much stronger."



How much can and should investors trust Adam Neumann?

Neumann dominates We. He has majority control of the company despite not having a majority economic interest in it, thanks to shares that give him extra voting power. Such arrangements have come under increasing scrutiny, because they've helped protect tech titans such as Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, Alphabet's Larry Page, and Snap's Evan Spiegel from being held accountable by investors or the public at large.

But even before his company has gone public, Neumann has given prospective investors reason to worry about how he'll exercise his power once it does.

He reportedly purchased buildings only to turn around and lease them to WeWork. Over the past five years, he's raised $700 million by selling off his WeWork shares or using them to guarantee personal loans. And he and the company reportedly set up a new corporate structure recently that would allow him and other insiders to avoid paying taxes on any dividends We might pay out — while sticking other investors with double taxation.

Those moves are "red flags" for investors, said David Erickson, a senior fellow in finance at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of business.

When you consider them in combination with each other, "People start to get a little nervous about, geez, is this right management?"

In May, We announced that it was setting up a $2.9 billion fund jointly with outside investors to purchase commercial properties that the fund would then lease to WeWork. Neumann plans to hand over his interest in the properties he's purchased and leased to WeWork over to the new fund. 

But the fund raises its own questions, because its outside investors' interests may not always be aligned with We's.



Will this be another Uber?

We is only the latest unicorn, or startup worth $1 billion or more, to head to the public markets this year. But it's the most valuable and, perhaps, the most anticipated since Uber.

But that's not necessarily such great company to keep. Uber's stock has performed poorly since its IPO and is trading below its offering price. And it's not alone. Lyft and Slack — two other mammoth, well-publicized startups that went public earlier this year — are also trading well below their initial prices.

Uber in particular, though, may worry We and its watchers. The company's offering price was significantly below initial expectations and ended up valuing the startup at only a slight premium to its highest private valuation.

And public investors have proved less tolerant of its losses than its private backers. After announcing a $5 billion loss for its second quarter, the company saw its stock plunge

If you're an institutional investor and bought shares in Uber or Lyft or Slack at the IPO, "you've lost money to this point," Wharton's Erickson said.

That's left a bad taste in the mouths of such investors, who will be crucial to the success of We's debut.

"That creates a potentially challenging backdrop" to the IPO, he said.



How is competition affecting the market?

When Neumann founded WeWork in 2010, his new company had few rivals other than Regus. But the market has changed drastically since then, especially recently.

Dozens of other startups now offer coworking spaces. And many of the established names in real estate are getting into the game, either by setting up their own coworking divisions or by teaming up with the players.

The international giant Hines recently announced a deal with the startup Industrious to create Hines Squared, focused on coworking. Boston Properties has Flex, its own coworking offering. Tishman Speyer, another big commercial landlord, last year launched Studio, yet another coworking concept.

Last year, 69 different coworking providers listed space on Truss, said Smith, its cofounder. This year, that number is past 256.

"A lot of people don't talk about that and aren't really aware of how many other competing coworking and [flexible lease] concepts are out in the market competing with WeWork that did not even exist a year ago," Smith said.

That growing competition could pose multiple challenges for WeWork. Much of its business model hinges on being able to charge a higher price for rent than it's paying landlords and, potentially, to be able to raise its prices over the life of its leases. But in a competitive market, it may not be able to raise prices and, in fact, may have to offer significant discounts to lure customers. That's particularly the case as other coworking concepts try to compete against it by offering more high-end features or targeting potentially profitable niches of customers.

But it also could face an increasingly competitive market not just for clients, but also for space. WeWork owns few of the buildings it uses. Landlords could lease space to rivals, reserve space WeWork would have gotten access to in the past for their own coworking arms, or offer the startup space in only less desirable buildings or areas.

For now, WeWork is kind of like the Kleenex of the coworking market, Smith said. It's the brand potential customers recognize and seek out. It also has a big advantage from its huge network of spaces; when they travel, its customers can often find a WeWork office in which to work if they need one.

But as its rivals become better known, begin to offer similar or better services, and build out or team up to create their own networks of spaces, those advantage could fade, said Walter Johnston, a vice president of credit ratings at the research firm Morningstar.

"That's definitely a concern going forward," he said.



13 successful tech leaders who struggled as immigrants before making it in America

$
0
0

elon musk

  • The tech industry is filled with the powerful stories of immigrants who made it big after moving to the United States.
  • For many now-moguls, however, there were struggles and strifes along the path to their success.
  • We rounded up 13 tech leaders who struggled as immigrants but later proved the American Dream possible.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

More than a third of the top tech companies in the US were founded by people born outside of the country.

Their success stories drive many immigrants to come to the US in hopes of realizing the American Dream.

Read more:There's a record number of immigrant-founded companies on the Fortune 500, despite Trump-era policies

But just looking at their success makes it easy to overlook the fact that a lot of immigrant tech industry giants had to overcome other problems – from language barriers to financial constraints – to achieve their extraordinary success.

Here are 13 tech leaders who struggled as immigrants but later proved the American Dream possible.

Eugene Kim contributed to a previous version of this article. 

SEE ALSO: From Tesla to Pfizer: 14 major US companies founded by immigrants

Sergey Brin had a very 'difficult first year' in the US

 

Google cofounder Sergey Brin was just 6 years old when his family emigrated from the Soviet Union to settle in Maryland. His first memory of the US was of "sitting in the backseat of the car, amazed at all the giant automobiles on the highway," his mother Eugenia Brin told Moment Magazine.

She says Brin struggled to adjust to the new surroundings early on. He was bashful and spoke English with a heavy accent, which made the first year a "difficult year for him." 

"We were constantly discussing the fact we had been told that children are like sponges, that they immediately grasp the language and have no problem, and that wasn't the case," she said.

It may have taken Brin longer to learn English, but he ended up in Stanford's PhD program in computer science, where he met Google cofounder Larry Page. Now Google is a $366 billion company, and Brin has a net worth of almost $30 billion.



Elon Musk was born in South Africa and later moved to Canada to attend college — he later moved to the United States and founded his first company

Elon Musk, the acclaimed tech leader and founder of SpaceX and Tesla, was born and raised in South Africa before obtaining Canadian citizenship in 1989. According to Inc., Musk speaks often about his upbringing in South Africa, detailing the struggles of growing up in that community.

When Musk moved to Canada to pursue his degree from Queen's University in Ontario, the now-mogul managed to survive on a mere $1 per day. He later transferred to the University of Pennsylvania, where he earned two degrees. Musk founded his first company, Zip2 Corporation, in 1995.

He became a US citizen in 2002. That same year, Musk earned his first billion when PayPal was acquired by eBay for $1.5 billion in stock. He would later become the creative mind behind both Tesla and SpaceX. He has a current net worth of $19.7 billion



Sundar Pichai had little access to a phone, computer, or the internet growing up. Now, he's Google's CEO.

According to an article by CNN, Google CEO Sundar Pichai grew up in a small, poor town in India before moving to the US to attend university. 

Pichai recalled the time after his family got their first phone. 

"It became a communal thing. People would come to call their kids," Pichai told CNN. "And so for me, it showed the power of what's possible with technology."

Pichai attended Stanford on a full scholarship and received his MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. He later worked at Applied Materials and McKinsey before joining Google in 2004. In 2015, he became the company's CEO. 

Sundar Pichai has recently clashed with President Trump over his immigration policies and "travel ban." 

"It's really important that we don't make it a tech-versus-the-rest-of-the-country issue," Pichai said onstage in January 2018 during a Q&A event in San Francisco organized by MSNBC when asked about immigration by the hosts Kara Swisher and Ari Melber.



Max Levchin lost his accent by watching American TV shows

Paypal cofounder Max Levchin was born in Ukraine but moved to the US when he was 16 years old. 

Levchin says his family was quite poor when they got here in 1991, and he had a strong accent while speaking English. Although he was fluent in English, Levchin had a hard time understanding all the cultural references people were making at school.

To help his cultural assimilation, Levchin relied on American TV shows. He says he found a TV in a dumpster and fixed it to watch all the TV shows he wanted to.

"That's how I lost my accent and got a crash course on 1990s American pop culture," he told Silicon Valley Business Journal.

Just 7 years after settling in Chicago, Levchin cofounded PayPal in 1998 alongside Peter Thiel and Elon Musk. It was acquired by eBay for roughly $1.5 billion in 2002.



Chamath Palihapitiya grew up on welfare before becoming a billionaire investor

Chamath Palihapitiya, born in Sri Lanka, moved to Canada at the age of six. Early on, his father was unemployed and his family lived above a laundromat, relying on welfare.

But, being less privileged only motivated Palihapitiya to work harder. He'd obsess over the Forbes' Billionaires List, one daydreaming of making it big.

Finally, he got an electrical engineering degree from the University of Waterloo, and quickly became one of the most successful tech leaders at a very young age. 

He was the youngest VP in AOL's history at the age of 26. He was instrumental in Facebook's growth early on, becoming one of the longest-tenured senior executives there.

In 2011, he quit Facebook to launch his own venture capital firm called Social+Capital Partnership, which is now one of the fastest-growing VC firms in Silicon Valley.



Jan Koum lived on food stamps before he sold WhatsApp for $19 billion

WhatsApp cofounder Jan Koum was born in Ukraine, where grew up in a house with no hot water.

Koum was only 16 years old when his family moved to the US. They settled in Mountain View, CA, where they lived on food stamps. His mother worked as a baby sitter, while he was a cleaner at a local grocery store. His father died in 1997, never setting foot in Mountain View, while his mother died of cancer in 2000.

Despite all this, Koum was smart enough to teach himself computer networking through a book he bought at a used bookstore. He ended up attending San Jose State University and later found a job at Yahoo as employee #44.

Fast-forward to 2009, Koum founded WhatsApp, a messaging app that was later acquired by Facebook for $19 billion. His estimated net worth is $7.2 billion.



Jerry Yang only knew one English word when he first arrived to the US

Yahoo cofounder Jerry Yang, born in Taiwan, was only 8 years old when he moved to San Jose, CA in 1976. As the story goes, Yang only knew the English word "shoe" when he first set foot in the country. He says it took him 3 years to become fluent in English.

But that didn't stop him from achieving academic excellence. Yang got both his bachelor's and master's in electrical engineering at Stanford University. There, he met David Filo, and together they cofounded Yahoo, arguably the biggest internet portal in the 90s.

Yang stepped down as Yahoo CEO in 2009 and left the company in 2012. But he was able to build an estimated net worth of $1.15 billion along the way and remains a very active investor in the Valley.



Sanjay Mehrotra's US visa application was rejected 3 times before he cofounded SanDisk

For Sanjay Mehrotra, the cofounder of the $18 billion company SanDisk, it was what he had to deal with before he even arrived in the US that set him back.

Born and raised in India, Mehrotra was accepted to UC Berkeley when he was barely 18 years old. But the US consulate in New Delhi rejected his visa application three times, before finally approving it after his father spoke to the counselor for 20 minutes. 

Mehrotra eventually finished his master's in computer science and electrical engineering at Berkeley. Right out of school, he worked for Intel, where he met SanDisk cofounder Eli Harari.

In 1988, they founded SanDisk, and 26 years later, it has a market cap around $18 billion with more than 8,700 employees worldwide.



Tien Tzuo lived through the mean streets of Brooklyn in the 70s

Anyone who lived through the 70s and 80s in New York City knows how rough things were back then. 

Tien Tzuo, Zuora founder and former Salesforce CMO, lived through those times right when his family moved from Taiwan to settle in the heart of Brooklyn in the 1970s.

Tzuo says he was mugged a few times growing up there, as the borough was mostly comprised of immigrants and some gangs. 

But it didn't deter him from excelling at school, and Tzuo ended up earning an electrical engineering degree at Cornell University. 

After school, Tzuo found a job at Oracle, and later became Salesforce's #11 employee. He served in several executives roles at Salesforce, before moving on to launch his own company called Zuora in 2007.

Just last month, Zuora raised $115 million, valuing the company close to $1 billion.



Andy Grove escaped from Nazi rule and worked as a busboy before turning Intel into the most powerful semiconductor company in the world

Andy Grove was born in Hungary and spent years hiding from the Nazis, before arriving in the US in 1957. 

With very little money and limited English language skills, Grove had difficulty settling into his new life in the US. He worked as a busboy during his college years in New York, while his girlfriend and future wife, Eva Kastan worked as a waitress.

Eventually, Grove earned a Ph.D. in chemical engineering at UC Berkeley and found a job at Fairchild Semiconductor. That job led him to an executive role at Intel in its early years, where he ended up becoming the CEO for over a decade.

Led by his leadership, Intel became the world's largest semiconductor manufacturer, and one of the most powerful tech companies ever. Steve Jobs, who often called Grove for personal advice, considered Grove his "idol."



Mike Krieger almost gave up on Instagram because of a flaw in US immigration law

Mike Krieger seriously considered asking his Instagram cofounder Kevin Systrom to replace him before launching the company, because he couldn't get a US work visa.

In 2010, Krieger, originally from Brazil, applied for an H1-B visa, the document needed for foreigners to legally work in the US. But even after three months of applying, he hadn't heard back and had to consider moving back to Brazil.

"It was approaching the point of hard conversations. I had moments where I was like, 'Maybe I should just tell Kevin to forget about it and find somebody who is easier to hire,'" Krieger told Bloomberg.

Eventually, Krieger obtained his H1-B visa and started working on Instagram, which he built in a matter of weeks. 

Instagram ended up getting acquired by Facebook for $1 billion in 2012. It now has more than 150 million active users worldwide.



Vinod Dham, the 'Father of Pentium,' only had $8 in his pocket when he first got to the US

Vinod Dham is widely regarded as the "Father of Pentium," for his work at Intel, building the first flash memory chip.

But before all the fame, Dham was a poor college student just trying to make ends meet. According to Venturebeat, when Dham first came to the US in the 1970s, the Indian government gave $8 to foreign tourists. Students could get an additional $20 if they bribed the right people, but he refused to do it and had only $8 in his pocket when he arrived.

But he was able to get off the ground, thanks to a loan from the University of Cincinnati's study abroad office. He also found a research assistant job that paid him $325. Upon graduation, Dham found a job at Intel and the rest is history.

He later served as the CEO of Silicon Spice, a company that sold for $1.2 billion in 2002. Currently, he's a venture capitalist.



Christian Gheorghe was a limo driver in New York before founding a company that sold for $500 million

Christian Gheorghe, CEO of business analytics software Tidemark, is a serial entrepreneur who sold his previous startup to SAP for $500 million.

Before his success, Gheorghe was a limo driver in New York City, working his way through immigrant life. It was during one of those rides where he met Andrew Saxe, his future business partner who helped him build a company that sold to Experian a few years later.

In Romania, where he grew up, Gheorghe sold music records and taught himself English by listening to American music. He also taught himself to code by hacking into video games on knock-off PCs.

Now he runs Tidemark, a startup that's raised more than $93 million from some big-time VCs, including Andreessen Horowitz, Greylock Partners, and Redpoint Ventures.



Jeff Bezos donated $100 million to fighting homelessness — and in an unusual move, he's letting the charities control how it's spent (AMZN)

$
0
0

Jeff Bezos, Amazon founder and CEO, speaks at The Economic Club of Washington's Milestone Celebration in Washington, Thursday, Sept. 13, 2018. Bezos said that he is giving $2 billion to start the Bezos Day One Fund which will open preschools in low-income neighborhoods and give money to nonprofits that helps homeless families.

  • Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos is acting as a hands-off philanthropist with his Day 1 Families Fund. 
  • Through the fund, Bezos gave nearly $100 million to 24 nonprofits working to combat family homelessness in the US. Now, he's leaving millions of dollars at the discretion of each charity, Recode reported.
  • Typically, funders are stringent with their donations, restricting how the money can be spent and asking for quarterly updates. Bezos hasn't specified how his donations should be spent, other than combatting homelessness, and he's only asked for one update per year.
  • Bezos' unconventional, laissez-faire approach to philanthropy could garner criticism, but the charities he is serving are both baffled and delighted.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos is acting as a hands-off philanthropist: he's given nearly $100 million to charities combatting family homelessness, and now he's leaving the millions of dollars at their discretion, Recode reports.

Bezos launched the $2 billion Bezos Day One Fund in September 2018. It currently has two projects: the Day 1 Families Fund, which includes the annual leadership awards given to the 24 charities combatting homelessness; and the Day 1 Academies Fund, which is launching a nonprofit that will eventually open preschools in underserved communities.

Typically, funders are stringent with their donations to nonprofit charities, restricting how the money can be allocated and asking for quarterly updates. Bezos is instead taking a laissez-faire approach: the richest person in the world hasn't specified how his donations should be spent, other than the broad directive of combatting homelessness, and he's only asked for one update per year, according to Recode.

Of the recipient charities, 15 received $5 million grants, and the remaining nine received $2.5 million grants.

Bezos historically hasn't prioritized philanthropy. In 2017, The New York Times reported that Bezos had only given about 1% of his wealth to charity. Notably, Bezos has not signed The Giving Pledge, a pledge created by Bill and Melinda Gates with Warren Buffett that signifies a commitment of wealthy individuals to give more than half of their wealth towards philanthropy. Tech execs including Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Sheryl Sandberg, Larry Ellison, and Reed Hastings have all signed the pledge. Jeff Bezos' ex-wife, MacKenzie Bezos — who is now considered the third-richest woman in the world — signed the pledge in May 2019. 

Read more: MacKenzie Bezos is officially Amazon's second-largest individual shareholder and the third-wealthiest woman in the world

Bezos' scouting process for the recipients of the Day 1 Families Fund grants was also non-traditional. Foundations typically announce grants and accept applications from prospective recipient nonprofits. In the case of the Day 1 Families Fund grants, Recode reported that an advisory board composed of eight experts in homelessness put together a shortlist of prospective charities and invited them to apply for the grants. (One charity head told Recode that she was called directly by Bezos' personal attorney, Paul Dauber, inviting her to apply). The bulk of the application was a simple, 500-word essay for charities to describe how they would spend the millions of dollars from the grant to combat family homelessness.

Recode notes that Bezos' laissez-faire approach could have downsides, however: the recipient nonprofits could flop even after receiving these enormous grants, and inadequate monitoring from the Day 1 Fund could lead to "mishaps," the head of CharityWatch, an organization that monitors how efficiently nonprofits use donations, told Recode.

Here's the full list of 2018 Day 1 Families Fund Awardees: 

  1. Abode Services, Fremont, CA • $5 million
  2. Catholic Charities Archdiocese of New Orleans, New Orleans, LA • $5 million
  3. Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Miami, Miami, FL • $5 million
  4. Catholic Community Services of Western Washington, Tacoma, WA • $5 million
  5. Community of Hope, Washington, DC • $5 million
  6. Community Rebuilders, Grand Rapids, MI • $5 million
  7. Crossroads Rhode Island, Providence, RI • $5 million
  8. District Alliance for Safe Housing (DASH), Washington, DC • $2.5 million
  9. Emerald Development and Economic Network, Cleveland, OH • $2.5 million
  10. FrontLine Service, Cleveland, OH • $2.5 million
  11. Hamilton Families, San Francisco, CA • $2.5 million
  12. Heartland Family Service, Omaha, NE • $5 million
  13. Housing Families First, Henrico, VA • $2.5 million
  14. JOIN, Portland, OR • $5 million
  15. LA Family Housing, North Hollywood, CA • $5 million
  16. Northern Virginia Family Service, Oakton, VA • $2.5 million
  17. Primo Center for Women and Children, Chicago, IL • $2.5 million
  18. Refugee Women's Alliance, Seattle, WA • $2.5 million
  19. SEARCH Homeless Services, Houston, TX • $5 million
  20. Simpson Housing Services, Minneapolis, MN • $2.5 million
  21. The Salvation Army, Center of Hope, Charlotte, NC • $5 million
  22. The Salvation Army of Greater Houston, Houston, TX • $5 million
  23. UMOM New Day Centers, Phoenix, AZ • $5 million
  24. Urban Resource Institute, New York, NY • $5 million

SEE ALSO: 41 photos of Amazon's incredible journey from the dot-com crash to a trillion-dollar company

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 7 lesser-known benefits of Amazon Prime

My mom was an accountant, and I still use the 4 best money lessons she taught me today

$
0
0

women working

  • My mom worked as an accountant for her day job and as a bookkeeper for small business on the side.
  • She taught me the importance of looking at the numbers, scrutinizing expenses, and looking through contracts with a fine tooth comb.
  • My mom also taught me that hiring skilled professionals is key — it can help you save both time and money.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Growing up, I would hear stories about my mom's job as an accountant for a commercial real estate company around the dinner table. We would hear terms thrown around like "debit," "credit," and different ways to incorporate macros in spreadsheets.

Then she started doing bookkeeping for small businesses on the side. Getting an inside look at how she managed their finances was an eye-opening experience. When my father started his own side business and I got to help out with the books, I really learned from my mom about what it means to manage your finances well.

Here are four of the lessons that have stuck with me for years:

1. Tracking numbers matters

You may have heard of the advice to track your numbers, but it really is that important. You need to see how much you're earning and what you're spending before making effective changes to our financial life — personal or in your business.

Tracking your finances is much easier thanks to technology. Back when I first started helping my mom with bookkeeping, we had to keep track of paper invoices and input everything manually (you can take a guess at how old I am). Now, there are apps and bookkeeping services that can automatically enter in numbers for you.

Once you have the raw data in front of you, it becomes easier to see how you are faring on your financial goals, or to set a savings goal. For example, my mom would look at profit/loss statements to make sure the businesses were earning money. It could even help see where you're overspending and change your ways.

2. No number is too small

You know that phrase "small leaks sink great ships?" It's absolutely true, especially when it comes to your finances. It's not about cutting back on those lattes. Rather it's other expenses you may have overlooked, like recurring memberships you don't use, or not bothering to check for lower prices elsewhere on your car insurance each year.

My mom would scrutinize my dad's business expenses every quarter to see what he was spending on and whether or not there was a similar service for less. If there was something he never used — like a bunch of magazine subscriptions to industry-specific magazines he never read — she promptly canceled them. That alone saved my father hundreds of dollars a year.

3. Read the fine print

I get it: Jargon in contracts can be super confusing and intimidating, to say the least. But if you don't understand what it is you're signing, you could be in for a rude awakening.

One of my mom's clients went on an overseas trip and was shocked at how much the entire trip cost. As my mom looked into it, she discovered that her client was using a credit card that had a foreign transaction fee attached to it — she was essentially paying an extra 3% for her purchases.

Now, each time I sign a contract or consider opening a new financial product, I always look at the fine print to ensure I'm not going to get caught with fees. Or at the very least, understand what it is I'm signing up for before putting my name on the dotted line.

4. Work with skilled professionals

Not to brag, but my mom was pretty awesome at her job — there's a reason she was promoted every few years and was booked out on bookkeeping clients. It's probably because she worked without much hand-holding, and saved her clients and the company she worked for money by doing all of the above-mentioned things.

I've learned that even though it can cost more to work with someone who is good at what they do, it's absolutely worth it. I once hired a few contractors to help with my freelance business and I saved so much time and stress working with one that cost a bit more, but had rave reviews from other business owners.

This philosophy applies to products, too. My mom purchased office items that were better quality — she still has her office chair 20 years later. I remembered that office chair when it came time to purchase mine for my home office. Spending a bit more for a quality ergonomic chair was a great choice because it encourages me not to slouch and I can pretty much guarantee the chair will last me a long time.

Managing your finances well doesn't have to be hard. It does take discipline and a willingness to work in your best interest. Or in my mom's case, her client's best interest. Either way, I'm grateful to have learned skills from my mom that I can use for a lifetime.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Most hurricanes that hit the US come from the same exact spot in the world


22 high-paying tech jobs for people who love being glued to their computer screens

$
0
0

software engineer

  • Jobs in tech tend to be very high paying.
  • Using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we looked at wages and employment in 22 occupations that rely heavily on computer science and data analysis.
  • Computer and information systems managers topped the list with an annual salary of $142,530.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Spending all your time on a computer is one thing — making money off that is another. With high-paying tech jobs always in demand, why not combine both?

The Bureau of Labor Statistics' Occupational Employment Statistics program provides data on the number of people employed in various occupations and industries and what they typically earn. Using that data, we found the median annual earnings as of May 2018, the most recent period for which data is available, for 22 occupations that rely heavily on computer science and data analysis in their work.

Unsurprisingly, occupations at the cutting edge of technology tend to be very high-paying. All 22 of the occupations we've highlighted had median annual earnings above the overall national median of $38,640 reported by the BLS.

Here are those tech occupations, ranked from lowest to highest median annual pay, along with the number of people employed in those jobs:

SEE ALSO: Here's how much money everyone who works in America's houses of worship make every year

22. Computer operators make an annual salary of $45,840.

Total employed in the US: 34,700

What they do, according to O*NET: Computer operators monitor electronic data processing equipment in several fields, including science, business, and engineering. 



21. Statistical assistants make an annual salary of $48,330.

Total employed in the US: 11,010

What they do, according to O*NET: Statistical assistants compile data to use in statistical formulas and studies, and put together charts and graphs.



20. Computer-user support specialists make an annual salary of $50,980.

Total employed in the US: 630,700

What they do, according to O*NET: Computer-user support specialists provide customer support for computer users, which including answering questions, fixing computer problems, or giving advice on how best to solve an issue.



19. Computer-network support specialists make an annual salary of $62,770.

Total employed in the US: 181,360

What they do, according to O*NET: Computer network support specialists test and troubleshoot network systems like LAN and WAN networks. They also perform network maintenance to make sure there are no internet outages.



18. Commercial and industrial designers make an annual salary of $66,590.

Total employed in the US: 33,200

What they do, according to O*NET: Commercial and industrial designers design products ranging from cars to home appliances to children's toys.



17. Web developers make an annual salary of $69,430.

Total employed in the US: 127,300

What they do, according to O*NET: Web developers design websites and make sure those sites are up to date, have creative graphics, and can support a large number of users at once. 



16. Network and computer-systems administrators make an annual salary of $82,050.

Total employed in the US: 366,250

What they do, according to O*NET: Network and computer-systems administrators install and configure LAN and WAN systems, and make sure the network is able to support several users at once. They may also monitor websites under the network to make sure they operate without any network interruptions. 



15. Postsecondary computer-science teachers make an annual salary of $82,220.

Total employed in the US: 32,430

What they do, according to O*NET: Postsecondary computer-science teachers teach college courses in computer science. If they have a specialty, like design or research, they may teach computer science courses in those fields as well.



14. Operations research analysts make an annual salary of $83,390.

Total employed in the US: 104,200

What they do, according to O*NET: Operations research analysts apply mathematical modeling to develop decision-making, policy-making, or other managerial strategies. 



13. Computer programmers make an annual salary of $84,280.

Total employed in the US: 230,470

What they do, according to O*NET: Computer programmers create, modify, and test computer code, and usually work from specifications made by software developers.



12. Statisticians make an annual salary of $87,780.

Total employed in the US: 39,920

What they do, according to O*NET: Statisticians apply mathematical methods to collect data, and then interpret that data for use in agriculture, business, or economics.



11. Computer systems analysts make an annual salary of $88,740.

Total employed in the US: 587,970

What they do, according to O*NET: Computer systems analysts look at data to improve computer system performance. They also look at user requirements, system capabilities, and workflow to upgrade systems.



10. Database administrators make an annual salary of $90,070.

Total employed in the US: 110,090

What they do, according to O*NET: Database administrators implement computer databases and coordinate changes to those databases.



9. All other computer occupations make an annual salary of $90,270.

Total employed in the US: 381,380

What they do, according to O*NET: This position is made up of all the other computer workers who aren't in any main categories on this list.



8. Electrical engineers make an annual salary of $96,640.

Total employed in the US: 186,490

What they do, according to O*NET: Electrical engineers research, design, and test electrical equipment for use in commercial, industrial, military, or scientific use.



7. Information security analysts make an annual salary of $98,350.

Total employed in the US: 108,060

What they do, according to O*NET: Information security analysts implement and monitor security measures to protect networks and confidential data. They may also respond to computer security breaches and viruses.



6. Applications software developers make an annual salary of $103,620.

Total employed in the US: 903,160

What they do, according to O*NET: Applications software developers create computer software and analyze users' needs to fix software issues. They may also supervise computer programmers to make sure the software works effectively.



5. Computer-network architects make an annual salary of $109,020.

Total employed in the US: 152,670

What they do, according to O*NET: Computer network architects design computer information networks like LAN and WAN and other data communications networks.



4. Systems software developers make an annual salary of $110,000.

Total employed in the US: 405,330

What they do, according to O*NET: Systems software developers research, design, and test operating systems-level software, which is usually used in industries ranging from medicine to aerospace to business.



3. Computer hardware engineers make an annual salary of $114,600.

Total employed in the US: 60,750

What they do, according to O*NET: Computer hardware engineers research and create computer equipment for a wide range of industries, and also supervise the manufacturing of equipment and components.



2. Computer and information research scientists make an annual salary of $118,370.

Total employed in the US: 30,070

What they do, according to O*NET: Computer and information research scientists conduct research and come up with solutions to computer hardware and software problems.



1. Computer and information systems managers make an annual salary of $142,530.

Total employed in the US: 391,430

What they do, according to O*NET: Computer and information systems managers plan and coordinate electronic data processing, information systems, and computer programming.



Coca-Cola is sold in all but 2 countries on Earth. Here's what their ads look like around the world.

$
0
0

Coca Cola China

  • Coca-Cola is sold in all but two countries in the world: Cuba and North Korea.
  • In every country, Coca-Cola uses unique advertising to appeal to vastly different cultures, but every ad is still unmistakably for Coke.
  • Despite Coca-Cola being seemingly everywhere, political circumstances — wars and dictatorships, mainly — have thwarted production in many countries over the years.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Coca-Cola is sold everywhere. Well, almost.

Ever since it was first created by John S. Pemberton in 1886, Coke has been a favorite among Americans, and starting in the early 1900s, it slowly grew into a global phenomenon. Today, there are two places where you still can't buy Coke: Cuba and North Korea. But that wasn't always the case.

Coca-Cola opened one of its first bottling plants in Cuba in 1906, but pulled production in 1962 because of a trade embargo, not long after Fidel Castro took over the country.

Since 1950, North Koreans haven't been able to buy Coke either, thanks to the Korean War breaking out that same year.

The only thing that has ever stopped Coca-Cola from being sold is politics getting in the way of business, with conflicts like World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War effectively ceasing production in some countries (trade embargoes haven't helped). 

Despite political circumstances, Coca-Cola has managed to sell its wares almost everywhere (the last addition was Myanmar, which began internal bottling of the product in 2013). The company's advertising looks different in each of the over 200 nations where it operates — but the ads are still unmistakably for Coke.

Here's what Coca-Cola ads look like in 16 different countries around the world.

SEE ALSO: 8 ads and products that sell America to the world, from blue jeans to Coca-Cola

This ad appeared in Beijing, China, in 2004.

When Coca-Cola first came to China in 1927, it was a big hit. But in 1949, when communist leader Mao Zedong took over, Coke, along with other imported goods from the West, was banned.

It didn't return until 1979, and by then many Chinese people had never tried it. In time, the drink caught on, and today China is Coca-Cola's third-largest market, after the US and Mexico.



This South Korean ad dates back to 1986.

Coca-Cola began selling in South Korea in 1970 under the Doosan Beverage company, part of the larger Doosan conglomerate.



This 1994 billboard in Vietnam reads, "It's so nice to see you again."

Once a US trade embargo lifted in 1994, Vietnamese citizens saw the return of the soda brand within the year, around three decades after it had been pulled from the market due to the Vietnam War.



A giant Coke poster adorns a building in Bangkok, Thailand, in 2013.

The first Thai Coca-Cola plant opened in Bangkok in 1949.



This Coca-Cola delivery van shows an ad in Indonesia from 1998.

Coca-Cola has been on Indonesian shelves since 1932, but it didn't open its first bottling plant there until the early 1990s.



This billboard went up in advance of the 2018 FIFA World Cup in Kaliningrad, Russia.

In 1979, Coca-Cola arrived in what was then the Soviet Union, in advance of the 1980 Moscow Olympics. The first bottling plant opened soon after the fall of the USSR in 1994.



This billboard in Warsaw, Poland, which measured 26,000 square feet, drew criticism from locals when it was put up in 2000 because it turned an office building into ad space.

Despite being within the Soviet bloc, Poland got its first taste of Coke long before the Russians, in 1957. It gained popularity throughout the '60s, until its first plant was opened in 1972.



A Coca-Cola ad in the Monastiraki neighborhood of Athens, Greece, in 2011.

Greece got its first shipment of Coke in 1969, exactly half a century ago.



A construction fence in Berlin, Germany, featured a large interactive Coke ad in 2013.

Germany got its first taste of Coke in 1929, where it soon proved very popular.

However, during World War II, Coca-Cola was unable to ship its proprietary syrup to Nazi Germany, so German Coca-Cola employees came up with Fanta, which was made from leftover fruit peels. Its famous citrus flavor wasn't added until the 1950s.

While Germany was split into West and East in the aftermath of the war, East Germans could only smuggle in the soft drink, until it was officially for sale a year after Germany's reunification.



One of the famous trams in Lisbon, Portugal, displays a Coca-Cola ad in 2006.

Coca-Cola opened its first bottling plant in Portugal in 1958.



A three-dimensional Coca-Cola ad above a newsstand in Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2010.

Argentina had its first Coca-Cola bottling plant in 1942.



A Coke billboard hangs behind a Palestinian militant, who shoots rounds in the air during a rally in Ramallah, a Palestinian city just north of Jerusalem, Israel, in 2006.

Coca-Cola has a bottling plant in the Palestinian city of Ramallah, along with other plants in nearby Jericho and Tulkarem. In 2016, it opened a plant in Gaza, which employs 270 people. It's been in the region since 1998.



A Coca-Cola billboard from 1977 in Israel.

Coke asked to open shop in Israel in 1949, but for reasons that remain unknown, the new government blocked its entrance. By the 1960s, Americans who sympathized with Israel thought it was strange that Coke was sold throughout the Middle East but not Israel. After some lobbying (and a change of heart by the Israeli government), the soft drink was introduced there in 1966.



This 2012 billboard from Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates, features a decidedly Western activity: a barbecue in the park.

Coke first came to the United Arab Emirates in 1988.



Two women in burqas sit below a Coke billboard in Kabul, Afghanistan, in 2006.

In 2006, Coca-Cola invested $25 million in its first bottling plant in Kabul, Afghanistan.



A Coca-Cola ad in a cafe in Aswan, Egypt, in 1980.

Coca-Cola first came to Egypt in 1946.



WEBINAR: Patty McCord, co-creator of Netflix’s famous culture deck, on avoiding common management traps

$
0
0

Patty McCord

Leading a team to success is almost always more challenging than it seems.

If you're aiming to become a top-tier people manager, you'll want to join Business Insider Prime's webinar this month. We'll ask Patty McCord, the first chief talent officer at Netflix, to break down the most dangerous traps that bosses fall into — and how to avoid them.

McCord has spent decades helping businesses build dream teams. She helped create Netflix's influential culture deck, which broke down radical practices like not putting a cap on vacation days and encouraging employees to interview elsewhere.

Now McCord is an HR consultant to organizations ranging from early-stage startups to massive banks. She recently authored "Powerful: Building a Culture of Freedom and Responsibility."

Join us on August 27 at 1 pm EST for this exclusive opportunity. It's a must-see for startup founders, people managers, and anyone interested in culture or leadership. Audience members will be invited to ask questions.

BI Prime members, check your inbox for an email invitation with the subject line "Save the Date" for details on joining this member-exclusive event.

If you're not yet a member, sign up.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Serena Williams and Alexis Ohanian have a combined net worth of $189 million. Here's how they make and spend their money.

3 reasons a master's in business analytics could be a better investment than an MBA if you're looking to boost your career and salary

$
0
0

studying library

  • A master's of science in business analytics is a program that allows students to obtain technical and business skills within one year.
  • It grew in popularity around five years ago, and has since experienced a global 300% increase in applicants, according to education research firm QS Quacquarelli Symonds.
  • There's growing demand from top employers for graduates with this degree.
  • Experts told Business Insider that there are three main factors that should drive the decision to obtain an MSBA: time and cost; work experience; and access to resources.
  • Click here for more BI Prime stories. 

While MBAs continue to be a popular offering for executives looking to take their careers to the next level, the fairly new master's of science in business analytics has become a strong competitor.

The degree has seen a surge in popularity within the past five years, with top-ranked schools like MIT Sloan, Carlson at the University of Minnesota, and McCombs at the University of Texas offering the program. Global applications have grown 300%, according to education research firm QS Quacquarelli Symonds. Deans of these schools say graduates can expect jobs in data science, quantitative analytics, and data business analytics at top companies like Apple and Amazon.

In exclusive interviews with Business Insider, several experts listed why the MSBA might be a better fit for some than an MBA. Here are the top three reasons.

Think about how much time and money you're willing to spend.

MSBA programs tend to be a year in length instead of two or more, so students generally save half the cost and time required by an MBA.

The initial investment leads to starting salaries upwards of $70,000 for graduates. That number could be even higher if you're a domestic student.

"The interesting thing is that if you have a US student who's coming to this program, starting salaries are often significantly higher than the international average," said Sri Zaheer, dean of the Carlson School of Management. "In one year, many of them are getting the kinds of salaries that MBAs would normally get."

Then consider work experience.

Applicants to an MSBA usually have one to two years' work experience, compared to the four or five years' of work experience many MBA programs require. 

Daniel Kahn, senior research executive at QS, tells Business Insider that job candidates recognize the potential of the skill set they can acquire through an MSBA, even when they have very little job experience themselves.

"The employment industry wants people who can program, who can do business analytics," Kahn said. Potential employees can now meet that need earlier on by obtaining this master's. 

Finally, look at the resources you'll be able to access. 

Business schools also promise students access to better work experience. MSBA students interact with the same big names as MBA students, as they work with similar career advisors.

"You go into MIT and you'll find yourself having access to the same employers that MBAs are looking at," Kahn said.

Students at Carlson have access to the Carlson Analytics Lab, through which they can work to solve data-driven problems for companies like $15 billion Land O'Lakes.

"You know, it's not theoretical," Ellen Trader, the director of the lab, told Business Insider. "These are real problems the companies are coming to us with, and they really do intend to deploy the work."

Teddy Bekele, CTO of Land O'Lakes, told Business Insider that he's hired at least one person from the Carlson MSBA class every year since working with the analytics lab.

"As far as new talent, this is our predominant pipeline," he said.

SEE ALSO: Here's what you need to know about a master's in business analytics, a one-year program that could lead to MBA-level earnings at half the cost

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Taylor Swift is the world's highest-paid celebrity. Here's how she makes and spends her $360 million.

Read the application 2 founders who bootstrapped their business used to get into Y Combinator, the startup accelerator that launched Airbnb and Dropbox

$
0
0

Prolific founders

  • Y Combinator is a startup accelerator that's launched successful companies such as Airbnb and Dropbox.
  • Prolific is a company that helps researchers find quality data sources. They're part of Y Combinator's summer 2019 batch.
  • Here's Prolific's successful application to Y Combinator.
  • Click here for more BI Prime content.

During the first year of her PhD program, in 2013, Ekaterina Damer began to question scientific research standards.

Damer was studying social psychology at the University of Sheffield, in the United Kingdom, and she noticed that behavioral and psychological scientists were increasingly conducting their research online. In particular, many relied on Amazon Mechanical Turk, a crowdsourcing platform where workers can complete short tasks like surveys.

But Damer was troubled by the fact that MTurk workers received a median wage of just $2 an hour (according to a 2017 working paper), as if they were in an online "sweatshop," she told Business Insider. What's more, it could be hard to tell if bots— not humans — were actually completing the experiments, meaning results weren't reliable.

So Damer and her cofounder Phelim Bradley, who has a PhD in genomic medicine and statistics from Oxford University, started a side project: a service that would "democratize access to behavioral data." 

Today, Damer and Bradley are the founders of Prolific. It's a startup that helps researchers collect high-quality data by connecting them with the appropriate pool of participants (say, females between ages 30 and 35). Prolific says it takes multiple precautions to ensure that participants are trustworthy — and paying attention during experiments.

Prolific is currently enrolled in the summer 2019 batch at Y Combinator, the famed startup accelerator that's launched the likes of Dropbox, Airbnb, and Stripe.

Read more: Read the application form that got the 'Spotify for meditation' into the selective startup accelerator that launched Airbnb and Dropbox

The company is farther along than some other YC startups. For the past five years, Damer and Bradley have bootstrapped Prolific (i.e., they haven't taken money from outside investors). In that time, they've built a team of 15 people, and registered more than 3,000 researchers and 70,000 regularly active participants across the globe. Participants are paid at least $6.50 per hour.

The founders' main goal in joining YC is to use the capital to start scaling. (YC invests $150,000 in each participating company, in exchange for 7% of the business.)

"Bootstrapping creates stress," Damer said. Because money is always tight, she added, "you can never get ahead of the game," and you don't have much freedom to experiment with different growth strategies.

Prolific recently shared its successful YC application publicly. Damer said she spent about a week filling out the form.

And while she's thrilled to have been selected, Damer told other candidates that writing your application is worth it even if you don't get in. "At the very least," she wrote in a blog post, "it'll help you reflect on where you're at in your startup journey and help you work through important business and strategic questions."

Read more: A former Y Combinator partner says a founder's answer to this one question on the tech accelerator's application strongly predicts their startup success

Here's Prolific's original application to Y Combinator. The accelerator is currently accepting applications for winter 2020. (Some data about the company has been redacted, per Damer's request. The rest of the text is being published as provided to Business Insider.)

[Editor's note: Damer said she didn't answer some of the questions below because they weren't applicable to Prolific. She also preferred not to disclose some of the answers she did provide.]

COMPANY

Company name:

Prolific

Company url, if any:

https://www.prolific.ac

If you have a demo, what's the url? For non- software, demo can be a video.

(Please don't password protect it; just use an obscure url.)

https://youtu.be/BQ6dP0JNaNQ

Describe your company in 50 characters or less.

Quickly find research participants you can trust.

What is your company going to make?

We've built a marketplace that connects researchers (from both academia and industry) with instant, high quality, global research participants. On top of that, we've built infrastructure for research: Prescreening tools (from niche segments to nationally representative samples), user validation software (to ensure high data quality), and research tools (e.g., longitudinal functionality allowing researchers to follow up with participants over weeks or months).

We're going to build (1) tools for data reuse (to reduce research redundancy and waste), (2) the infrastructure to experiment with different incentive structures (e.g., micro payments, bonus payments), (3) a mobile app so participants can earn money taking part in research from their phone, when convenient, and researchers can ask the right questions at the right time (e.g., contextual surveys based on location, time of day etc.), and (4) an API platform (so anyone can tap our trusted and diverse participants). We have several customers interested in plugging their experimental/survey software into Prolific to allow their customers to easily access participants without needing to manage their own audience product. The next scale.ai/usertesting.com could be built on top of the reliable participants we already have, allowing for an ecosystem of people-powered tools that wouldn't be built otherwise. Just like Stripe is the go-to financial infrastructure layer for most YC startups, we hope to be the go-to infrastructure layer for "human responses".

Where do you live now, and where would the company be based after YC?

(List as City A, Country A / City B, Country B.)

We're currently based in Oxford, UK. After YC, the company would be based in San Francisco & London.

CONTACT

Email address of the founder who is filling out this application:

[Redacted]

Phone number(s):

[Redacted]

FOUNDERS

Please enter the url of a 1 minute unlisted (not private) YouTube or Youku video introducing the founder(s). (Follow the Video Guidelines.) 

https://youtu.be/l1oq3NavalE

Please tell us about an interesting project, preferably outside of class or work, that two or more of you created together. Include urls if possible.

Phelim and I have worked together on my latest research project around diversity and whether it can spark curiosity and creativity. The experimental setup was complex because it was designed longitudinally and required follow-up with participants: Every 2 days over the course of 14 days I'd ask participants to complete a 5-min study session. Phelim wrote python scripts to help me to combine, manage, and analyze the data sets (there are no good tools to automate this, yet...). Interestingly, in this work we found that exposure to diversity can spark curiosity, but not necessarily creativity.

How long have the founders known one another and how did you meet? Have any of the founders not met in person?

Phelim and I have known each other for 6+ years. We met in 2012 while studying for our Masters at the University of Cambridge. Phelim was doing a Masters in Computational Biology and I was studying Social and Developmental Psychology.

CATEGORY

Which category best applies to your company?

Marketplace

You're being asked the following questions because you are a biotech, healthcare or hard tech company.

Describe the next few stages in developing your product. For each stage, how much time and money will it take?

If you were accepted into YC, what could you accomplish by Demo Day in late August?

Does your product need regulatory approval (i.e., FDA)? If so, what is the approval process? What is your plan to get approved, and how much time and money will it take?

Please describe the scientific basis for your product. How does it work?

(It's best if you address your answer to a scientist, but one who is not a specialist in your field)

What experimental data (if any) do you have showing that this would work?

If appropriate, link to relevant academic papers providing additional support for your idea.

For each paper, please briefly describe it and how it relates to your company, and whether it was by your team or by others.

PROGRESS

How far along are you?

We've had [redacted] in GMV in 2018 and [redacted] of that was revenue (200% YoY growth). We're already profitable. We've achieved this by building a great MVP that users shared with friends and colleagues. We're a tight-knit team of 13 (4 devs, 3 support reps, 2 data analysts plus CFO/advisor, COO, CTO, and CEO). The two co- founders worked on this part-time until 8 months ago. We have not raised any money so far.

How long have each of you been working on this? How much of that has been full-time? Please explain.

Both of us have been full-time only the last 8 months and part-time (during PhDs) for the preceding 4 years. We've effectively used our PhD programs as incubators to get Prolific off the ground.

Are people using your product?

Yes

When will you have a prototype or beta?

How many active users or customers do you have? If you have some particularly valuable customers, who are they? If you're building hardware, how many units have you shipped?

We have 2000+ active researchers (paying customers) and 30,000+ monthly active participants. We have dozens of customers who have spent over $10,000 with us, and a few who have spent over $100,000, including [redacted] (in collaboration with [redacted], a major grocery store in the UK), respectively.

Do you have revenue?

Yes

What was your revenue in the last full calendar month?

(Please use USD. If none, enter '0')

[Redacted]

Your revenue 2 months ago?

[Redacted]

Your revenue 3 months ago?

[Redacted]

Your revenue 4 months ago?

[Redacted]

Your revenue 5 months ago?

[Redacted]

Your revenue 6 months ago?

[Redacted]

Anything else you would like us to know regarding your revenue or growth rate?

We have over [redacted] in deferred revenue which will be booked from prepaid funds going forward. We have seasonal effects (primarily due to the academic calendar). December to February are typically the slower months and we expect stronger growth in the coming months (we're projecting [redacted] in March).

If you've applied previously with the same idea, how much progress have you made since the last time you applied? Anything change?

We haven't applied previously.

If you have already participated or committed to participate in an incubator, "accelerator" or "pre-accelerator" program, please tell us about it.

We participated in Oxford University's Startup Incubator for 6 months in 2014/15, which helped point us in some useful directions (e.g., in terms of learning about business, finding great hires). However, we're now facing the challenges (and opportunities) of scaling – things like growth & product strategy, organizational scaling – so we're hoping to find mentors and investors via YC that can help us take Prolific to the next level.

IDEA

Why did you pick this idea to work on? Do you have domain expertise in this area? How do you know people need what you're making?

In the first year of my PhD I had a hard time finding participants for my research – there simply wasn't any decent site or service that could meet my needs. We then realized that my colleagues, and my broader network, had the same problem.

I've recently completed a PhD in this area. In fact, being a PhD student was a great help to building the business, because I was the target customer. I was going to conferences, constantly learning what the biggest pain points were and what the ideal solution would look like. I also spent time at various institutions abroad, including at Columbia and Stanford Universities, developing deeper insight into what researchers care about. Our MVP, and many of our early Prolific researchers came from these in- person conversations, and the MVP quickly gained traction as a result, and has now spread far beyond my network!

I know people want the product because: 1) I need it! (I've published research using data from Prolific, which I couldn't get anywhere else) 2) we have thousands of paying customers who are advocating for us and referring colleagues and we're seeing the resulting network effects: Researchers recommend Prolific at conferences, in their results, and online, without any Prolific staff being involved (just search for "prolific.ac" on Google Scholar) and 3) we're seeing new market segments we haven't explicitly targeted using our product. 20% of our customers now are from companies running market and user research and they're getting in touch regularly to request features specific to their use case.

What's new about what you're making? What substitutes do people resort to because it doesn't exist yet (or they don't know about it)?

"People research" is broken: Finding participants is difficult and slow and with other platforms data is biased, low quality, and incentives are misaligned. Researchers want participants and data they can trust, but they resort to platforms which provide disengaged people who signup for pennies, fraudsters and bots, leaving them crying out for higher quality solutions.

We're tackling this by obsessing about trust, data quality, and "truth". We use proprietary user validation, statistical algorithms and machine learning to weed out bots and bad actors which plague the rest. Competitors have no minimum pay policies and often pay next to nothing to their participants leading to misalignment, disengagement and bias or fraud. We have a variety of incentives built in to our platform including pre- qualification for studies, two-way feedback, and guaranteed minimum pay. In addition, researchers can transparently explore the marketplace and get in touch with participants directly. As a result, both sides of the marketplace trust our platform, which means that participants provide high quality data and researchers conduct high quality research.

Our platform also creates virtuous cycles for our community. Demand from researchers attracts further participants to our platform. We leverage our increased supply of participants to innovate, for example enabling researchers to collect nationally representative samples at the click of a button! This virtuous cycle powers our growth. At the moment, many use non-dedicated solutions like Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk), which were not developed to solve these problems, and as a result suffer from poor quality and limited feature innovation.

Who are your competitors, and who might become competitors? Who do you fear most?

Right now, our biggest competitor is Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk) – it's been the primary solution for academic researchers in the past 10 years. Smaller competitors in the academic space include TurkPrime, Positly, and Testable Minds.

The wider "people research" space (including market and user research) is a much bigger market, and more crowded. The largest potential competitors include Nielsen, Dynata (formally Research Now SSI), YouGov, Cint, IposMori, Qualtrics, and SurveyMonkey Audience.

We see the greatest growth in on-demand online platforms that give researchers direct control over data collection. So we fear other fast-moving startups the most, such as panel aggregators ([redacted]) and platforms for user research ([redacted]).

We hope that our upcoming API will allow us to be the "people research" infrastructure layer of some of these companies, turning them into partners/clients instead of competitors.

What do you understand about your business that other companies in it just don't get?

1. TRUST. Researchers aren't willing to pay if they can't be sure the data will be good. Participants aren't willing to answer thoughtfully and honestly if they can't trust their efforts will be fairly appreciated. Other companies in our space don't treat their users well – they underpay participants, randomly kick them out of surveys, and don't help mediate or resolve disputes between the two sides of the marketplace (researchers <> participants). As a result, trust is low, data quality is bad, and research progress is way slower than it needs to be.

2. INCENTIVES. Competitors in our space don't get that it's important to align incentives to achieve high data quality. On MTurk, the misaligned incentives create a race to the bottom: Winners are those who complete the most "HITs" per hour, or those who spin up bots to complete "HITs" on their behalf. It's a constant battle between researchers and participants, and it's slow and difficult for the researcher to screen the data for quality.

3. CONTROL. Researchers want transparent access and control over the data collection process because *how* the data is collected will affect the results. Traditional vendors do not realize this – they act as gatekeepers who slow down the research and reduce its quality.

How do or will you make money? How much could you make?

(We realize you can't know precisely, but give your best estimate.)

We currently charge a 30% commission to individual customers for the core service of finding and screening research participants. Going forward, new products and services (e.g., representative samples, external API) will add additional revenue streams and enable upsell. And we're currently working on a SAAS hybrid model (subscription + participant rewards) for institutions and enterprises.

The market opportunity is huge. The "people research" space alone (we which we define as behavioral science + user research + market research) is a $100B+ global opportunity, but this is just the beginning as this market is nascent and growing. Fundamentally, we're developing a broad solution to a worldwide problem (learning about people).

How will you get users? If your idea is the type that faces a chicken-and-egg problem in the sense that it won't be attractive to users till it has a lot of users (e.g. a marketplace, a dating site, an ad network), how will you overcome that?

We will grow our users by continuing to enhance our core product through user research and nudging users towards referring friends and colleagues. We will accelerate virtuous growth cycles by building tools for data reuse, sharing, and collaboration. We'll further enhance network effects and lock-in by developing an API platform and an ecosystem of tools and a community around it. Plus, we'll start doing direct sales to reach new institutional and enterprise customer segments where we have low penetration.

As a marketplace, balanced growth of both sides of the platform is important, and we've already solved the first stage of the chicken-and-egg problem with 30,000+ monthly active participants and 2000+ monthly active researchers. We have an allocation algorithm which distributes studies evenly to participants ensuring balanced platform growth.

EQUITY

Have you incorporated, or formed any legal entity (like an LLC) yet?

Yes

What kind of entity and in what state or country was the entity formed? (e.g. Delaware C Corp)

Limited company in the UK.

Please describe the breakdown of the equity ownership in percentages among the founders, employees and any other stockholders. If there are multiple founders, be sure to give the equity ownership of each founder.

[Redacted]

Have you taken any investment yet?

No

List any investments your company has received. Include the name of the investor, the amount invested, the premoney valuation / valuation cap, and the type of security sold (convertible notes, safes or stock).

How much money do you spend per month?

How much money does your company have in the bank now?

How long is your runway?

(e.g. 5 months)

If you have not formed the company yet, describe the planned equity ownership breakdown among the founders, employees and any other proposed stockholders. If there are multiple founders, be sure to give the proposed equity ownership of each founder.

(This question is as much for you as us.)

Please provide any other relevant information about the structure or formation of the company.

[Redacted]

LEGAL

Are any of the founders covered by noncompetes or intellectual property agreements that overlap with your project? If so, please explain.

No

Who writes code, or does other technical work on your product? Was any of it done by a non- founder? Please explain.

100% of our code was written by my co-founder (Phelim) and the four engineers we've hired (all still employees). No work was done by anyone outside the company. Phelim built the entire MVP, and we've hired using revenue to date.

Is there anything else we should know about your company?

(Pending lawsuits, cofounders who have left, etc.)

No

OTHERS

If you had any other ideas you considered applying with, please list them. One may be something we've been waiting for. Often when we fund people it's to do something they list here and not in the main application.

Please tell us something surprising or amusing that one of you has discovered.

(The answer need not be related to your project.)

Did you know that most claims about human psychology and behavior in the world's top journals are based on WEIRD samples (i.e., from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic societies)? This is a big problem as you can't generalize most findings to the broader population or to other countries!

CURIOUS

What convinced you to apply to Y Combinator?

We hope to learn from the best of the best. We've learned so much from YC podcasts, YC Startup Class, essays, and other YC founders, so we would love to have the opportunity to get advice from YC partners first-hand. We admire many YC alumni building world-changing marketplace and infrastructure companies (e.g. Airbnb & Stripe) and we can see the impact of being part of a community of ambitious, optimistic people motivated to solve fundamental problems at global scale. We have strong traction, and now is the first time we could go to YC for the full-time program.

How did you hear about Y Combinator?

I heard about YC through my cofounder Phelim (psb31), who had heard about it from his friend Mark Moriarty (mbym).

SEE ALSO: Read the application form that got a company with $0 in the bank into the selective startup accelerator that launched Airbnb and Dropbox

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Ray Dalio shares what he's learned from his succession plan at the world's largest hedge fund

Viewing all 120553 articles
Browse latest View live