Given the headline, I was expecting a comparison of large teams versus smaller nimble (Instagram, Path) ones. There's a whole lot to be written about group dynamics in terms of headcount.
But in terms of this discussion. I have to take issue with choice of market opportunity based on personal financial situation.
"Where are you now? There’s no right answer to this. If you’re 30 and broke and wondering how you’re going to pay the rent in 6 months, its harder to swing for the fences. If you sold your last startup so you’ll never have to worry about food and rent again, big startup board."
Not only does this lead to rather arbitrary founder-market fit, is the success rate curve of the smaller startup really that more evenly distributed than the larger ones? I doubt it.
That said, it sounds like you may have been a landlord yourself, saw the pain point in vetting tenants, and went for it. Niche, but already a service that
1) is arguably underserved
and
2) your customers are used to paying for.
Best of luck and it sounds like you might have some takers here on HN already.
But in terms of this discussion. I have to take issue with choice of market opportunity based on personal financial situation.
"Where are you now? There’s no right answer to this. If you’re 30 and broke and wondering how you’re going to pay the rent in 6 months, its harder to swing for the fences. If you sold your last startup so you’ll never have to worry about food and rent again, big startup board."
Not only does this lead to rather arbitrary founder-market fit, is the success rate curve of the smaller startup really that more evenly distributed than the larger ones? I doubt it.
That said, it sounds like you may have been a landlord yourself, saw the pain point in vetting tenants, and went for it. Niche, but already a service that 1) is arguably underserved and 2) your customers are used to paying for.
Best of luck and it sounds like you might have some takers here on HN already.