1. I may well have misunderstood or misrepresented what you've said. But it was not deliberate.
2. I concede that point #5 was unfair. It occurred to me as I was writing and watching the video, and I decided to add it on the spur of the moment. I should have thought about it more carefully. I've added an update to that effect.
I'd much rather have a 10x return in one year than a 100x return in three (or five or ten, which are more typical numbers).
The above is a stupid exaggeration. It only approximates the truth if your average return is more than 3x per year. (Ok, the 10 year example works if your expected safe ROI is 30% per year over 9 years also works, but good luck with that.)
The article was written by someone that has seen a net loss by investing in start ups. Overall this is fairly common for the industry. It's vary easy to see some 10x returns and think you know what you are doing even if you are not really making any money but that's just conformation bias. So while I apologies for using stupid, he is really giving poor advice.
1. I may well have misunderstood or misrepresented what you've said. But it was not deliberate.
2. I concede that point #5 was unfair. It occurred to me as I was writing and watching the video, and I decided to add it on the spur of the moment. I should have thought about it more carefully. I've added an update to that effect.