I was rejected 33 times and built a $390 million company at age 48

I was 48 years old when I left my job and enrolled in Stanford’s Entrepreneurial Studies program.

Most people, at this stage of their career, try to reduce risks, not introduce them. They have stable income. They have dependents. In technology, there is an implicit assumption that if you were going to take a big step, you should have already taken it. I decided to take the risk anyway.

Also read: Semenzato’s group invests R$20 million in a healthcare company and becomes a minority

For most of my career, I’ve seen Silicon Valley celebrate a specific kind of ambition: that of young people. We applaud founders who drop out of school and prodigies creating in college dorms.

These stories are real and extraordinary. But beneath them lies a silent narrative: the idea that reinventing yourself later in life is uncommon and that experienced professionals, who deeply understand an industry’s flaws and decide to correct them, are somehow the exception.

When I talk to seasoned executives considering going back to school or starting startups, the hesitation rarely has to do with ability or potential.

It has to do with perception. Taking risks after 40 is more often seen as a “midlife crisis” rather than a calculated choice. This isn’t just unfair — it’s economically shortsighted.

What Two Decades in the Industry Taught Me

Before Stanford, I spent decades working in enterprise data warehousing. Early in my career, I joined a small company and was sent to help expand the business across Asia-Pacific.

I had to sit down with customers in markets like Japan and speak as the company’s data storage expert — except I wasn’t, at least in the beginning.

I had to learn quickly. I had to admit what I didn’t know. There were many moments when I was at the limit of my ability.

Over time, these uncomfortable moments accumulate. One day you wake up and realize you actually understand the system. You know why certain architectures fail—you’ve seen enough cycles to recognize patterns.

In my late 40s, this pattern recognition was already working automatically for me. What I no longer had was the motivation that previously came from discomfort.

A friend who had gone through the Sloan Fellowship at Stanford suggested I apply. His advice was simple: put yourself back in an environment where you are not the expert and clearly define what comes next.

I applied. I was accepted. I was the oldest person in the program.

Shortly after starting the program, I received a call from an engineer I had worked with years before.

He had developed a new approach to cloud file access that challenged deeply held assumptions about how data storage systems should work. He showed me a prototype that went against what common sense said was possible.

At 28, I probably would have taken the plunge. At 48, the experience has led me to slow down and test everything from every angle before moving forward.

We spent months putting the idea to the test before fully committing. After graduating, we started presenting the project to investors and were rejected 33 times.

It’s not easy, but I’d seen enough cycles to know that investor consensus isn’t always aligned with customer reality. We move on.

The conviction to persist did not come from blind optimism. It comes from having seen this problem come up repeatedly over two decades.

I had already seen improvised and inefficient solutions. I had already participated in budget discussions. I knew this pain was structural, not temporary. Eventually, we found an investor who saw it the same way.

Today, LucidLink serves thousands of companies — including Paramount, Adobe, Shopify, and Spotify — and has grown into a global business, last valued in 2023 at $390 million.

We won an Emmy last year for transforming the way entertainment is produced.

I don’t tell this story to suggest that starting a business at 48 guarantees success. Does not guarantee. I tell you why this company wouldn’t exist if I had accepted the common idea that my time had already passed.

Why this is a business problem, not a cultural one

As AI transforms office work, more professionals will reach inflection points. Some will be replaced. Others will find that the roles they have mastered are evolving faster than expected.

At the same time, economic pressures are leading many to extend their working lives. Reinvention later in your career will become more common, not less. The question is whether the technology ecosystem will treat this reinvention as an asset or a liability.

Ageism is often seen as a cultural problem. It’s also a business problem. We lose when experience is discarded.

When more experienced professionals are subtly discouraged from building, we reduce the variety of problems being addressed.

In industries like infrastructure, healthcare, media and enterprise software, depth matters. Pattern recognition matters. Having experienced crises matters.

This is not an argument against young founders. Many transformative companies were created by people in their 20s.

It’s an argument against the idea that innovation belongs to a single demographic. Ambition has no expiration date. Experience, combined with a willingness to be uncomfortable again, can be a competitive advantage.

If we want the next generation of companies to solve tougher, more systemic problems, we must normalize career reinvention at every stage. Not because it feels inclusive, but because it makes economic sense.

Some of the most important companies of the next decade will be created by people who have already had one or two careers. The real risk is not that they will try and fail. It’s just that they decide, before they even start, that they’ve already missed their moment.