zlacker

>>sandsl+(OP)
I'm sure this will get downvoted into oblivion, but why should I or other engineers/entrepreneurs look at Sam Altman as a massive startup success story when his lone startup Loopt never really achieved product-market fit, and ended up in a firesale?

Across 5 funding rounds, Crunchbase lists Loopt as having raised $39 million and then was acquired (acqui-hired?) for $43 million. He didn't create any multiples of value for his investors. Loopt wasn't a breakout hit like so many other YC startups have been. It was certainly one of the first interesting location-based apps in the App Store, but soon was surrounded by other location-based apps and never really appeared to surface and gain traction.

Obviously Sam runs YC now and has dramatically improved it, but in the lens of being an entrepreneur, isn't he still essentially unproven, and not a success story in the startup world?

>>flyosi+ib
I think the answer is pretty obvious - the advice that successful people give is almost universally useless. The more down to earth less egotistical ones accept this, and don't give out specific advice (eg Warren Buffet, or Bill Gates). But others can't help it. Your premise that we should listen to only the very successful is not well based in that regard.

From first principles, if you were looking for someone to give startup advice, then you want someone who has: been through the process; doesn't suffer from survival bias which just elevates all the random things they did and weird habits they have to some kind of mystical formula; has seen many other people go through the process from the very early to late stages. That's why you should listen to Sam Altman. If you want to worship mega-entrepeneurs then there are many other avenues for that activity.