> It’s not just about the merits of your website – if it were we’d be at the Four Seasons 6 months earlier – it’s about whether you project energy, excitement, and confidence.
Thank you, Rap Genius, for packing everything depressing about what the industry I chose to spend my life working in has become into a single convenient sentence.
Let's be clear, Rap Genius is a consumer and social focused web startup and by definition exists in a highly competitive space. It is technically simple and can be replicated fairly quickly by a competitor. The product itself must exude energy, excitement and confidence to differentiate itself.
Why would anyone invest in something like that if the founders don't project those values?
If you have a product that's the result of real technological innovation or time consuming R&D and has real growth potential, you'll find investors regardless of your confidence and energy levels.
This seems like it should be true, but actually I can think of dozens of counterexamples just off the top of my head. There are in fact many fields of human endeavor where, if you're sufficiently good at your core competency, nobody cares if you project energy, excitement, and confidence.
> There are in fact many fields of human endeavor where, if you're sufficiently good at your core competency, nobody cares if you project energy, excitement, and confidence.
Probably because they're the bottum rung working for someone who is energetic, excited and confident. Essentially, if you don't need to lead anyone, you can have these traits. Or you work for the government.
Confidence is the only really defensible trait of the three. Lawyers, surgeons, accountants, and so on probably need to project at least that one, but nobody cares if those people seem energetic or excited.
Even the ability to project confidence isn't a universal requirement though. Nobody gives a rat's ass what an athlete in a solo sport projects.
The top doctors in any given field are some of the cockiest motherfuckers on planet Earth. There's no lack of confidence in that field. None.
And think about it: at the top of that profession (especially surgical specialties), you're basically selling to the uberrich. The field is highly competitive. It's a market predicated on referrals, networks, and especially social proof. Your skill is critical, but skill is a table stake.
Your average, run-of-the-mill, family doctor is a different story. But "baller ass" doctors need to project, well, ballin' assness.
The doctor who rescued MY life from a disabling illness is humble, because people who are cocky have something to lose if they admit they don't know the answers.
Ever get a diagnosis from a doctor who doesn't exude confidence when she gives it? It is the most unnerving experience I've ever had (in a hospital)...
Thanks for asking. I'm ok. Turns out I developed a medical issue that caused my body to dump salt, one of the causes of POTS (Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome) which is a known disorder.
Electrolyte pills solved it (at least, the symptoms). I discovered this by accident, when I had another reason to take electrolytes and then suddenly I could stand up again. Stupid doctors.
Competency can compensate for a demeanor that is listless, dull, and uncertain but if your profession requires direct engagement with customers you will likely be at a disadvantage. What are the counterexamples you developed?
Given a choice between someone who projects energy, enthusiasm, and confidence and someone who doesn't the latter person will normally have to demonstrate considerably more competence. In particular low energy and lack of confidence in an expert undercut a perception of competence.
> about what the industry I chose to spend my life working in
Would that be the VC-raising industry? Because there are many web startups out there that have had no such experiences, have avoided VC and chosen to simply grow slowly, happily and by investing the founder's time and energy rather than other (often highly dubious) people's money.
Don't be depressed because some fools are handing out millions to other fools, you don't need to compete with that. All that counts is your product.
It's unquestionable that you need energy, excitement and confidence to be good at something. Anything from being a doctor, lawyer to professional athlete.
So let's clarify these words before we start the strawmen arguments of "So lawyers should be jumping for joy and act like Billy Mays in the courtroom, right columbo?"
Energetic (Possessing, exerting, or displaying energy.) - You need to have energy about what you do. Stephen King is energetic about writing horror fiction. He doesn't high-five everyone around him but you can tell he puts his energy into his books.
Excitement (A feeling of great enthusiasm and eagerness) - What you do needs to excite you. It should be something that keeps you up at night thinking about it. A good surgeon should be excited to learn about new techniques and discoveries in his field.
Confidence (a feeling or consciousness of one's powers or of reliance on one's circumstances) - You absolutely must know that you are going to sink that next basket. You don't need to walk around like you're the best person at the game but you need to believe that you yourself have the ability.
So yes, you need these traits to excel. To argue this is really just leading towards a debate of "Well I choose a narrow definition of excitement and since doctors aren't that then it is irrelevant".
Projection (The act of projecting or the condition of being projected.) is going to be the only thing people can fall back on. I don't believe they are saying to fake some part, but it definitely is not what I'm saying. Having these traits leads to projecting these traits. Your excitement, confidence and energy comes out when you talk about what you love to do. It just does.
I'm sorry, I'm all in favour of loving what you do and agree that this generally leads to good results, but that interpretation frames the sentence in a completely different context than the original story, which is the following:
> So fundraising is a psychologically trying experience that depends very little on any sober analysis of the quality of your product
> It's unquestionable that you need energy, excitement and confidence to be good at something. Anything from being a doctor, lawyer to professional athlete.
Oh, that is VERY questionable. The first two are focussing on positive emotions and ignore the important role negativity plays. Smilarly, confidence does not in any way equate capability.
> Projection (The act of projecting or the condition of being projected.) is going to be the only thing people can fall back on.
No, that's just our intuitive mind being too lazy to do a rigorous analysis of the situation. I recommend "Thinking Fast and Slow" by Kahneman to fix this.
> The first two are focussing on positive emotions and ignore the important role negativity plays.
There's no definition of either that I know of that includes "positive emotions" and ignores "negative emotions". That's a made up definition.
> Smilarly, confidence does not in any way equate capability.
Never said it did. I also never said these were the only things you need. But you do need them.
There's no way forward without going to specifics. I guess I'd need to see an example of 5 or 10 industry leaders or greats, from any industry; Linus Torvald, Mary Roach, Warren Buffett, Jon Stwart etc... that did not have energy, enthusiasm and confidence.
Have you ever listened to an interview with Michael Jordan? He specifically stated he "knew" he'd make the next hoop.
Confidence is extremely important in athletics, engineering, business, etc. Some more than others. But someone with confidence issues will never be as efficient and consistent as someone who is not. You must have personal belief invested in yourself and your corresponding ability before you can really use it effectively.
I agree with excitement and energy though. I know quite a few people who hate their jobs but do them successfully.
I think this is more true for the startup funding industry, which is sort of its own little world. The core of business development doesn't necessarily depend on that kind of thing.
So true. The startup funding industry is much like a sales gig. One where you often are selling a product that doesn't even exist yet. But not to customers, to investors in hopes that customers will be there on the other side.
Nothing against the VC industry but it represents a majority of discussions on HN and little outside.
If you, as a startup founder, can't authentically and sincerely project energy, excitement and confidence about your idea, then something is either wrong with your idea or you are in the wrong business.
The problem with this logic is that "energy, excitement and confidence" don't have anything to do with the merits of an idea. An idea can be good without any exhibitions of personality. The tree still falls, after all.
However, if expressions about an idea do relate to the quality of that idea, each taken in isolation, what does that say about the concept of meritocracy? That perhaps meritocracy applies only to people and not ideas, and that "meritocracy" in this context has a much narrower definition than a plain reading of the word would suggest.
I mean confidence can be a part of execution... for example, when you are trying to sell a product. Ingenuity, perseverance, etc, are also attributes of execution and they are not strictly technical.
In other words, if you just have technology (and we're assuming not groundbreaking patentable-technology), you'll likely fail if you have no perseverance and no ability to convince people why it's useful.
All startup founders know they stand a better chance if they project energy, excitement, and confidence, and this is very cheap and easy to do, so they all do it.
As a result, experienced investors become inured, skeptical of it, and ignore it, knowing it's the easiest thing a founder can fake. They look for signals of more substantial stuff, be it the Three T's (Team, Technology, Traction) or something else.
In fact I would argue these days you stand a better chance of distinguishing yourself among investors if you pointedly do not exude energy and excitement at least, but rather sober, quiet confidence, competence, domain expertise, focus, and resolve.
That said, his points about actually being confident, and managing your own psychology, are right on.
The technology is easily commoditized but a team is not? Stop being so idealistic and understand what it truly takes to convince people with money to give you some, k?
Thank you, Rap Genius, for packing everything depressing about what the industry I chose to spend my life working in has become into a single convenient sentence.