@bobmcgrewai（Palantir、OpenAI 早期成员）： “Palantir 和 OpenAI 刚成立时，都被认为是荒谬的想法。” @soleio（Facebook、Figma、Dropbox 早期成员）： “我当时就被 Facebook 初创团队的凶猛与野心震惊了。” @seanrose（Slack、Box、Meter 早期成员）：“如果一家公司的核心论点充满了非凡的野心，那它大概率值得你关注。” @rsms（Spotify、Figma、Dropbox 早期成员）解释说： “逻辑很简单：如果所有人都说‘这是个好点子’，而你一开始就有一堆直接竞争对手，那你肯定已经来晚了。即使做得再好，也很难对世界产生真正影响。但如果某个人已经穿越探索之海、跨越研究之泥沼，却依旧对某个想法坚持不懈，那说明他们可能比我们看到得更远。” 2. 用“今天的产品”判断未来，是一个陷阱 @soleio 回忆第一次登录 Facebook：“我记得自己很失望。他们描述的版本比我那天看到的东西领先光年。” 同样，Figma 在 Dylan 给我讲述愿景那天，也更像是个原型，而不是产品。 @cjc（Stripe、Notion、Linear 早期员工）有类似观点： “我加入的很多公司做的是开发者产品或团队产品，而我不是开发者，也没有团队场景能真正使用它们。所以这种情况下，我通常会忽略自己对产品的第一印象。” @seanrose 也说：“Slack 最早期的时候真的很粗糙。引用 @stewart 的原话：它就是‘一坨巨大的屎’。2013–2014 的 beta 阶段，愿景已经在那了，但仍需要大量打磨。” 3. 创始人，比一切都重要 @cjc（Stripe、Notion、Linear 早期员工）： “创始人（和早期团队）对我来说永远是最重要的。我会努力工作、渴望胜利，但我希望是和那些我也希望看到他们胜利的人一起。当我加入 Stripe 时，其实更多是因为我觉得团队很特别。我对公司的信心反而是在之后才建立的。” @seanrose：“创始人的质量（和真诚）一直是我心中最重要的变量。” @rsms：“人和使命。是谁和为什么（而不是怎么做）。” @bobmcgrewai：“共同特征是：极具野心的目标 + 可靠的团队。” 野心再次出现了。 最后，用 @cjc 的一句总结作为收尾： “如果房地产最重要的三件事是地段、地段、地段，那创业公司最重要的三件事就是：人、人、人。” Three ways a spot a top 1% startup 1. Ambition bordering on “ludicrous” @bobmcgrewai (early Palantir, OpenAI): “Both Palantir and OpenAI were considered ludicrous when the companies were first started." @soleio (early Facebook, Figma, Dropbox): "I was surprised by the ferocity and ambition of the early Facebook team." @seanrose (early Slack, Box, Meter): “If a company’s thesis is marked by extraordinary ambition, it’s probably worth paying attention.” @rsms (early Spotify, Figma, Dropbox) explains: “The logic here is simple: If everyone says, ‘Yes, that’s clearly a great idea, and you have direct competitors on day one, you are definitely late to the game. Even if you excel and go above and beyond expectations, the chance of making a meaningful difference in this world is small-ish. However, if someone has sailed across the sea of exploration, waded through the bog of research, and is still going on about an idea, there’s a small chance that they are ahead of the rest of us and see something I’ve yet to see.” 2. Judging today’s product is a trap @soleio said that when he first logged in to Facebook, “I remember being disappointed. The version their team had described was light-years ahead of what I saw that day.” Likewise, Figma was more prototype than product the day Dylan laid out his vision to me for building a collaborative design platform.” @cjc (early Stripe, Notion, Linear) had a similar perspective: “Many of the companies I’ve joined were developer products or products that were meant for teams, so I couldn’t truly try the product myself, as I’m not a developer or didn’t have a team use case for it. So in general, I discount my own thoughts about a product in those cases.” @seanrose told us that “in the earliest days of Slack, it was rough around the edges. To quote @stewart, it was a "giant piece of shit." The bulk of the vision was there in that beta period from 2013 to 2014, but still awaiting refinement.” 3. Founders, over everything @cjc (early Stripe, Notion, Linear): “The founders (and early team)—nothing matters more than this to me. I’m going to work hard, and I want to win, but I want to do it with people whom I want to see win too. When I joined Stripe, I joined more because I thought the people were special. I had more conviction about the company itself later.” @seanrose (early Slack, Box, Meter): “Quality (and authenticity) of founders have always been the most important variable to me.” @rsms (early Spotify, Figma, Dropbox): “People and mission. Who and why (not as much ‘how’).” @bobmcgrewai (early Palantir, OpenAI): “The common pattern was an incredibly ambitious goal combined with a credible team.” There’s that ambition again. To close, in the words of @cjc: “If the three most important things in real estate are location, location, location, the three most important things in startups are people, people, people.”