
đ Thread. New deck getting published this week: "Consumer startups are awesome, and here's what I'm looking to invest in at Andreessen Horowitz." If you want to read it, subscribe to my newsletter here: https://t.co/262t8eh0wf









\U0001f447Thread.
— Andrew Chen (@andrewchen) November 1, 2018
Published a new essay: The red flags and magic numbers that investors look for in your startup\u2019s metrics \u2013 80 slide deck included! pic.twitter.com/w6HRD4o22f
From a metrics standpoint, it's important to analyze the acquisition mix, the quality of the signups, and the platform dependencies. In the deck, I talk through a bunch of the red flags I'm looking for. pic.twitter.com/5eXkLB0aYQ
— Andrew Chen (@andrewchen) November 1, 2018
More from Startups
Led Zeppelin wrote âRock And Rollâ in 30 minutes.
The White Stripes, âSeven Nation Armyâ, 10 min during a soundcheck.
The Rolling Stones, âI Canât Get No Satisfactionâ, 40min.
Making a startup in 24 hours is perfectly fine.
I really think this idea of starting a starup in 24 hours is bad idea. Gives people thinking that you can do something meaningful in short period of time. https://t.co/l3x2ov33Qn
— Myk Pono \U0001f60e (@myxys) November 10, 2018
I worked on my first startup for 2.5years. It was an events app. Sunk in cost and expectations were so high, that I had to close it, despite getting consistent revenue.
In comparison, I wrote @CryptoJobsList in 2 days. And it's way more meaningful than what I've been doing in my events startup for 2.5 years.
When I let go of my engineering ego and let go of expectations that I need to raise capital and hustle for 4+ years â I started lauching fast and interating fast without any expectations â then I started coming up with something truly meaningful and useful âš
12 startups in 12 months by @levelsio
24 hour startup by @thepatwalls
â are great challenges that make you focus on the end product value, iterate fast and see what sticks and ruthlessly kill what does not work.
THREAD:
https://t.co/8EmLYHHbLo
9-5s aren\u2019t the problem
— Hustle Smarter \U0001f4b8 (@Hustle_Smarterr) September 26, 2020
Letting them be your only income stream is
https://t.co/aMyO7K3IbM
The biggest asset you\u2019ll ever have is yourself
— Hustle Smarter \U0001f4b8 (@Hustle_Smarterr) September 26, 2020
Invest in it wisely
https://t.co/xv7QK5mdvD
18-25?
— Hustle Smarter \U0001f4b8 (@Hustle_Smarterr) September 27, 2020
Now is the time to take risks and improve
Don\u2019t waste this time
https://t.co/Ww2s97Kw5x
What would you say to someone who feels \u201clost\u201d?
— Hustle Smarter \U0001f4b8 (@Hustle_Smarterr) October 7, 2020
You May Also Like
Breaking News: House GOP to hold investigative hearing into DOJ\u2019s handling of Clinton Foundation probe. Top prosecutor to be summoned. https://t.co/HogyXHHcvo
— John Solomon (@jsolomonReports) November 21, 2018
I'm sure Huber is coming to DC *only* to discuss Clinton Foundation things with Meadows and his committee.
He for certain, like, won't be huddling with Horowitz or that new guy, Whitaker while he's in town. That would NEVER HAPPEN. [wink wink wink!] đ
I just spent a year and a half telling you they will SHOW YOU what they are REALLY DOING when they are READY.
Not before.
No matter how much whining is done about it.
I'm exhausted but it's worth it.
Now you know why they're f**king TERRIFIED of Whitaker, the closer tapped by Trump to come in late for the hysterical fireworks that will ensue soon.
Look who's suddenly fund raising for his legal defen- er, I mean, ha ha - his reelection campaign!
President Trump just attacked Adam on Twitter with his most profane insult yet. Will you chip in $5 to send Trump a message and show him you stand with Adam?
— Adam Schiff (@AdamSchiff) November 19, 2018
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.

Also a "man" thingâphysical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)

There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.

At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?