Given that Cal Henderson & Slack appears in the chart twice with different numbers each time, I'd take these figures with a grain of salt.
Plus the tone of the article makes it seem like a quick marketing piece to try and advertise their VC fund.
> ” If this data doesn’t get you off the couch and coding the next great product, I don’t know what will.”
Well, that’s a severe lack of imagination by the author. I can think of lots of reasons to start coding a new project that are not how much a few dozen of people earned in an IPO.
There are repeated entries for the same company+founder but with different values. It doesn't make any sense.
Additionally sometimes the founder's name is right in one row but not in the other e.g. Cloudflare's Matthew Prince (right) vs Matthew Price (wrong).
Not a good look.
Missing are the zeros (and negatives)
Now let's compare to the length of the list of national lottery winners, and how much time and capital each winner put in to achieve the win.
Where is the chart listing the negative opportunity costs from the other 99%?
This is so cherry-picked and editorialized that this feels unethical.
It claims an "average" from this list while intentionally neglecting less-successful IPOs and downright failures.
Also, I'd be curious to see what the exits are after the 3-6 month lockup period. Some startups IPO decently, but then tank.
How many of these were funded by Blossomstreetventures?
Slightly off topic, why do people use `mm` as the symbol for millions? Why not just `m` ?
What a gross overstep by Spotify. Over $9B combined between the two founders!?! Meanwhile bands are struggling to make it through the pandemic. Guess I'll be deleting my Spotify account. Barf.
cool story bro.
Nothing like publishing a textual data table as a giant picture.
"If this data doesn’t get you off the couch and coding the next great product, I don’t know what will." If the hope of a 9 digit payoff is what's motivating you to start a company, you're better off trying your luck on a roulette wheel.