Breaking Bad: The Founder's Dilemma

This post contains spoilers through Breaking Bad S5b:7

Breaking Bad's Walter White has been a superb entrepreneur, single-handedly amassing an $80 million cash mountain in 18 months or so. But his impressive gains have come at a staggering cost: He's lost his family, his freedom and $69 million of that fortune in one very, very bad deal.

It didn't have to be that way. For all of his smarts, White wasn't wise when it came to a classic founder's dilemma: When — and if — to exit.

White — being a meth lord — had no startup to sell, as it were. That just made his exit strategy simpler than that of the more typical entrepreneur, who has to wait around for Google or Apple or Yahoo to come calling. Since White's margins were gargantuan he could have exited whenever he deemed enough was enough, with his life intact, found money, and a reasonable body count (all things considered).

Yet he repeatedly passed up opportunities to exit. He undervalued the risk of jeopardizing the non-material assets of his enterprise (let's just call it a normal life) in his pursuit of two metrics: Ever more money; and, even more important to him, the vindication that has been driving him like Captain Ahab (more on that later).

Fans of the series can recite the best exit points from memory:

  • Stick to the original business plan: Stop at $737,000.
  • Accept a mercy offer from his billionaire former business partner to rejoin Gray Matter, the company had formed together years ago.
  • Count your money and your blessings when your secret dies with Gus Fring.

White's ego, bordering on the omnipotent, constantly blurred his vision. Entrepreneurs need a healthy ego — audacity is necessary. But ego is not sufficient. In excess it can be a fatal flaw. It must be tempered with at least a bit of humility.

There are exceptions to that rule. I've compared White to the decidedly not humble Steve Jobs: An entrepreneur who re-imagined a commodity product so disruptive it commands premium pricing and inspires copycats. But in reality White is more like another Apple founder: Ron Wayne. The little-known Wayne got cold feet and sold his 10% Apple stake back to Jobs and Steve Wozniak for paltry $2,300 a mere 12 days after they made him a partner. That stake would be worth $45 billion today, and would have put Wayne fourth on the Forbes 500 list — ahead of Oracle's Larry Ellison and behind Warren Buffett.

Wayne was wrong to sell, of course, but that hard life lesson didn't set him on a course of murderous self-destruction. White had made a similarly impetuous decision long before the series begins: He sold his stake in Gray Matter — a company that would become worth billions — for $5,000 to his co-founder. His reason wasn't lack of confidence, but anger when his partner and his girlfriend — Elliot and Gretchen Schwartz — hooked up.

Whites's megalomaniacal pursuit of a criminal empire is a pathetic attempt to undo that impulsive exit. And now the Schwartz's have pushed the exact wrong button by belittling White's early contribution to their success in an attempt to mend their own reputations by association.

Hell hath no fury like a founder scorned.

White has that rare founder's gene: Part genius, part tenacity, an abundance of conceit. But that isn't enough to succeed. You also need a touch of the gambler. They aren't the least bit sentimental about the chips in front of them.

Founders can be too sentimental, overestimating the potential value of what they have built and underestimating the risk of growing it themselves. Of course, founders are only wrong until they're right: Yahoo's Jerry Yang botched a deal with Microsoft because he didn't think $44 billion for a company then worth $37 billion (and $32 billion today) was enough. Mark Zuckerberg rebuffed a $1 billion offer from Yahoo and now his company is worth considerably north of 100 times that.

One way or another, the story of Walter White ends Sunday. Was he too emotionally compromised to ever make good business decisions? Should he have cut and run earlier? Or was his correct — just unlucky — to roll the dice as long as he did?

Earlier stories:



Interested in Tech, Politics, Media?
Follow me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

I've worked with founders, and they can definitely be as egotistical (and therefore shortsighted) as they are genius. For some reason, those two traits seem to go together! Great "back to business via Breaking Bad" post John C Abell. But exegeting BB from any angle (business or otherwise) is, I believe, no less important than analyzing the Greek tragedies. Lessons about the world, others and ourselves abound. Mary A Richards-but of course! The ultimate justice would be for Jessie to kill Walt. Personally, I'd put a Shakespearean twist on that. Walt might give Jessie the ricin then Jessie can pull the trigger on Walt. They die together, one unrepentant, one redeemed (albeit in death).

回复
Linda D W.

Data Scientist

11 年

Walter connects to people because we have all been vulnerable at one time or another. The fact that he is dying of lung cancer and fighting to leave behind a legacy of sorts, even if his identity was hidden, and provide for his family draws you in to his plight. Breaking Bad appeals to the sick, to entrepreneurs, or anyone feeling they wanted to strike back.

回复
Maritza Melendez

Sales Admin at Kawahara Nurseries

11 年

Great article and comparisons. I think WW began his business emotionally compromised, the love he had for his family started him manufacturing meth and kept him making money and pushing the limits. I don't think he realized how quickly and easily the money would come in and once it did he started bypassing what most would consider reasonable exit points. At some point in his journey with the increasing gravity of his actions, I believe his original purpose (to leave money for his family) took a backseat to his ego. Would his family be less taken care of with $10 mil than $80 mil? His ability to reason was blinded by dollar signs. Perhaps a basic economics class would have benefited him; the cost should not exceed the benefit.

回复
Monika Gangwer

Experienced Professional Educator/K-12 Principal/Web Design

11 年

I laughed out loud at this sentence because of it's simple truth. I only wish I'd thought of it! "Hell hath no fury like a founder scorned." I was also struck and encouraged to see you mention the absolute need for humility. I agree that a founder, a TRUE entrepreneur/pioneer (as opposed to the snake oil salesmen who never really had a product, nor was his IDEA of a product his own) there has to be a combination of EQ traits. We can't be all risk, all gamble, all sentimental, all humility or all alter-ego. There has to be a little 'snark', smarts, humility, the 'fun-factor', maybe even a tinge of mad-scientist and an ego but not an alter-ego. An ego would be you CARE about the endeavor & the people involved & you want them to want to show it off... I want my people to love it. I want my customers/clients to be fully satisfied. You want to be respected by your peers and DESERVE the respect. The alter-ego: instead of caring about the endeavor or the people, you care ONLY how you are viewed. Your project becomes your identity and soon your very being is defined by it. If your biz goes south, YOU don't have the confidence to survive. This leads to treating people as utilitarian. When the people become purely a means to an end, the balance, the sentiment and the whole point is lost, often making for a very rich and very miserable founder who brings it all down as fast as it was built. This is the anti-thesis of humility and is completely lacking in 'fun-factor'. Great article. I am hooked on these influencer posts!

回复
Theresa Smith, FMP

Facilities Management Professional ? Whisky Sommelier & Ambassador ? How can I help YOU today?

11 年

"For all of his smarts, White wasn't wise when it came to a classic founder's dilemma: When — and if — to exit." There have been moments when WW could have perhaps exited without the carnage of Ozymandias, but every time he could have done it, he came back because he liked the power of being Heisenberg. In fact, I would argue that with the creation of his alter-ego at the end of Season 1, Walt abandoned his initial rationalization for his venture. From that point forward, his motivation for enterprise was fueled by the Heisenberg persona...but he wasn't honest with himself about that. Heisenberg is a mogul. Heisenberg is cunning. Heisenberg is power. With that as the motivation, there is no need for an exit, unless it means to bigger and better things. If Walt had completely given himself over to the single motivation of being Heisenberg, the question of "IF" to exit would have been moot. Of course, it is the Jekyll & Hyde battle that makes for great TV drama. Walt (Dr. Jekyll) wants only to do enough so that his family will benefit. Heisenberg (Mr. Hyde) wants the raw power of business success. Walt needs an exit strategy, but Heisenberg doesn't. A man cannot serve two masters. In business, you need to be honest about your true goal. You cannot waffle between two incongruous endgames.

回复

要查看或添加评论,请登录

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了