Let’s End the Myth that Ideas Are Worthless • Hacker News Board

Re: Let’s End the Myth that Ideas Are Worthless

#51

Post by tgflynn » Mon, Jan 03, 2011, 2:47 AM UTC

livejake wrote: post #49

tgflynn wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if the idea is easy to implement than anyone will be able to copy that idea and the value will tend to zero. My strategy is the opposite - take ideas that are often simple to state but whose execution is so complex as to tax the limits of the human mind. Then if I succeed I shouldn't have to worry much about competition (at least for a couple of years).

Easy to implement ideas are easy to copy, but that doesn't necessarily mean the value of the idea will tend to zero. See Woot, Groupon, Craigslist, etc. There are network effects and first mover advantages that help the first to implement an idea and gain traction. I would say your strategy follows my point. In your case, the ideas that are often simple to state aren't valuable. The value is all in the execution.

You have a good point.

I often wonder why the software and internet businesses seem so strongly winner take all, where the winner is most typically not the first but the best (in a sense measured by the market) to execute an idea (ie. Microsoft, Google, Facebook). It seems like the classical economic view of competitive markets is becoming more and more of a fantasy world.

Re: Let’s End the Myth that Ideas Are Worthless

#52

Post by kls » Mon, Jan 03, 2011, 2:48 AM UTC

phlux wrote: post #5

kls wrote: post #3

I really do love the idea guy, they rail and rail "hey I am worth something" but the fact remains they are worth very little. Lets say for example I decided to start a company, I have a good group of guys that can do anything and we have capital. We don't need an idea to form a company, we could start a fabrication shop or a coin laundry and potentially profit just as much as venturing off and building a new and nove…

I think the answer is in the middle - however, I ask you; Are you a coder? Where is your billion dollar application then? If one is so capable of building something, why haven't you built XYZ and sold it for many millions already? If developers are so much more valuable than ideas - why isnt every single developer building something amazing? Why is there so much crappy software, so many crappy businesses? -- I bet yo…

why haven't you built XYZ and sold it for many millions already?

I have 3 exits, one to Hotels.com and one to TUI travel. I am a bad example for that one. None of the companies we built where revolutionary just a good team with good timing.

Re: Let’s End the Myth that Ideas Are Worthless

#53

Post by j_baker » Mon, Jan 03, 2011, 2:53 AM UTC

A1kmm wrote: post #45

The article is fighting strawmen. I've never heard anyone say that starting off with a good idea isn't important. A good idea is a necessary but not a sufficient condition. What the author doesn't argue against is that potentially good ideas are fairly abundant and easily obtained. These 'potentially good ideas' (that is, ideas which sound like they would work, but for which there is not yet any good evidence either…

I think this is a case of having a very vocal minority[1]. I do see this a lot on various online sites. And when people profess something loudly and repeatedly, others have a tendency to associate that opinion with a majority opinion.

[1] http://www.spring.org.uk/2007/07/loudest-voice-majority-opin...

Re: Let’s End the Myth that Ideas Are Worthless

#54

Post by apriori » Mon, Jan 03, 2011, 3:40 AM UTC

nlwhittemore wrote: post #14

kls wrote: post #3

I really do love the idea guy, they rail and rail "hey I am worth something" but the fact remains they are worth very little. Lets say for example I decided to start a company, I have a good group of guys that can do anything and we have capital. We don't need an idea to form a company, we could start a fabrication shop or a coin laundry and potentially profit just as much as venturing off and building a new and nove…

My problem with this argument is that it positions an "idea" person as static and fixed in time rather than dynamic and evolving. Over the life time of a startup, the idea becomes less about the initial spark and more about the way things evolve. Data can drive lots of that, for sure, which is why things like lean startup are so valuable. But what about the big decisions about where to go next? What's your next produ…

I agree with this, and sense some conflation between the terms 'concept' and 'idea' in this argument -- at least so far as it applies to the execution vs. ideas debate. Some seem to believe that the role of ideas in the process of a start-up is limited to the initial concept. But this is like saying that the ideas in a screenplay are limited to those contained in the two sentence 'high concept' that spurred the project, with the execution being the writer's typing and grammar.

However, it's not altogether clear just what execution means if it is necessarily divorced from ideas. Aren't all new features, enhancements and marketing campaigns driven by ideas and then carried out by technicians? Or can successful execution be attributed simply to coders writing code? By this view (which, granted, is an exaggeration) success can be achieved by simply filling a room full of contractors and assuming they will work something out.

Rather than being at odds, ideas and execution seem more like mutual components of the division of labor: one cannot work without the other, and both are participants of every stage of the process. However, it doesn't follow from this fact that ideas and execution are equally responsible for success. I view a venture's success primarily as a function of consistently applied creativity, imagination and discipline. Luck is a necessary too, but certainly cannot be executed.

While I recognize the importance of ideas and technical execution, I would argue that vision and imagination are scarcer, more valuable resources than technical proficiency and practical know how. After all, development needs can be fulfilled by contractors in a pinch, but the same cannot be said for the role of a visionary -- a fact may explain why Apple continues to compensate Jonathan Ives so handsomely when his pay could be used alternatively to hire dozens of young hacker savants and electrical engineers.

Re: Let’s End the Myth that Ideas Are Worthless

#55

Post by tgflynn » Mon, Jan 03, 2011, 3:52 AM UTC

apriori wrote: post #54

nlwhittemore wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My problem with this argument is that it positions an "idea" person as static and fixed in time rather than dynamic and evolving. Over the life time of a startup, the idea becomes less about the initial spark and more about the way things evolve. Data can drive lots of that, for sure, which is why things like lean startup are so valuable. But what about the big decisions about where to go next? What's your next produ…

I agree with this, and sense some conflation between the terms 'concept' and 'idea' in this argument -- at least so far as it applies to the execution vs. ideas debate. Some seem to believe that the role of ideas in the process of a start-up is limited to the initial concept. But this is like saying that the ideas in a screenplay are limited to those contained in the two sentence 'high concept' that spurred the proje…

How many highly successful startups have outsourced their development to contractors ? My guess is practically none.

I agree with you that ideas are needed throughout the process. In fact one of the points that certain people here seem unable to grasp is that software development is itself a creative activity that requires not only linear logical thinking but also continuous inspiration to find a good path through the solution space. It is not the equivalent of hammering nails to carry out someone else's grand design.

Re: Let’s End the Myth that Ideas Are Worthless

#56

Post by jacobian » Mon, Jan 03, 2011, 3:59 AM UTC

Let's not. Ideas really are worth nothing when compared to execution.

Don't take my word for it: look at successful companies. What're the ideas behind the top 10 Fortune 500 companies?

  1. WalMart - a bigger and cheaper convenience store
  2. Exxon - gasoline
  3. Chevron - gasoline
  4. GE - conglomerate: appliances, aviation, electronics, energy, weapons, etc.
  5. Bank of America - banking, investment banking
  6. ConocoPhillips - gasoline
  7. AT&T - telecommunications
  8. Ford - cars
  9. Chase - banking, investment banking
  10. HP - computers, consulting services

(Source: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2010/)

The very repetitiveness of that list kinda shows you that novelty isn't really that exciting, eh?

Want another data point? How about... oh I dunno... companies acquired by Google in the last few months:

  * Widevine - DRM for television
  * Phonetic Arts - speech recognition
  * BlindType - touch interface typing technology
  * Plannr - scheduling/calendaring
  * Quiksee - video
  * SocialDeck - gaming

(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Google)

Lots of good ideas there? Perhaps... but to my eyes each of these companies falls into the "$IDEA done right" style of startup. As do most, really -- nearly every startup pitch I've heard falls into the "X done right" rubric.

And that's by no means a slight: taking something that generally sucks and doing it right is really hard. But that's the point, isn't it? Nearly every idea's been done before... it's about delivering better than the competition.

So let's not start giving raw ideas much merit. This focus on results is good, and it's healthy, and it's what makes technology startups interesting. After all, technology is usually evolutionary, and rarely revolutionary.

[Edit: sources, formatting.]

Re: Let’s End the Myth that Ideas Are Worthless

#57

Post by Tycho » Mon, Jan 03, 2011, 4:06 AM UTC

That whole schtick seems tautological to me. It's like saying

"What's the use of having an idea if you have no idea how to implement it?"

Re: Let’s End the Myth that Ideas Are Worthless

#58

Post by j_baker » Mon, Jan 03, 2011, 4:22 AM UTC

jacobian wrote: post #56

Let's not. Ideas really are worth nothing when compared to execution. Don't take my word for it: look at successful companies. What're the ideas behind the top 10 Fortune 500 companies? 1. WalMart - a bigger and cheaper convenience store 2. Exxon - gasoline 3. Chevron - gasoline 4. GE - conglomerate: appliances, aviation, electronics, energy, weapons, etc. 5. Bank of America - banking, investment banking 6. ConocoPhi…

So then I take it that you feel watchpaintdry.com would be a hit if it were executed very well? Make no mistake about it, ideas are important. After all, look at some of the biggest names: Twitter, Facebook, AirBNB, Groupon...

Do you honestly mean to tell me that the idea behind these sites had absolutely zero influence on their success?

Re: Let’s End the Myth that Ideas Are Worthless

#59

Post by livejake » Mon, Jan 03, 2011, 4:33 AM UTC

tgflynn wrote: post #51

livejake wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Easy to implement ideas are easy to copy, but that doesn't necessarily mean the value of the idea will tend to zero. See Woot, Groupon, Craigslist, etc. There are network effects and first mover advantages that help the first to implement an idea and gain traction. I would say your strategy follows my point. In your case, the ideas that are often simple to state aren't valuable. The value is all in the execution.

You have a good point. I often wonder why the software and internet businesses seem so strongly winner take all, where the winner is most typically not the first but the best (in a sense measured by the market) to execute an idea (ie. Microsoft, Google, Facebook). It seems like the classical economic view of competitive markets is becoming more and more of a fantasy world.

Yeah, it's interesting. The reasons vary for each company and books could probably be written for each one. A key factor is network effects. Read up on network effects: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect

"In economics and business, a network effect (also called network externality) is the effect that one user of a good or service has on the value of that product to other people. When network effect is present, the value of a product or service increases as more people use it."

Not just internet and software businesses, railroads, telephone networks, and financial markets are other businesses that are impacted by network effects.

Re: Let’s End the Myth that Ideas Are Worthless

#60

Post by jimrandomh » Mon, Jan 03, 2011, 4:53 AM UTC

Some ideas are valuable. Most ideas are worthless. It is common to run into overenthusiastic "idea guys" with obviously worthless ideas, and it is easier to tell them that all ideas are worthless than to tell them that their idea, in particular, is worthleess; so we lie, and say that all ideas are worthless, even though we know that there are some exceptions.