This is an interesting article by someone who went through the actual coffeeshop version of the coffeeshop fallacy:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/recycled/200...
The coffeeshop fallacy
21–30 of 99 posts
Re: The coffeeshop fallacy
#22Since when does a coffee shop have a 10% success rate? According to a large study by the Speciality Coffee Association of America, independent coffee shops in the US have a 90% success rate. Perhaps the author mistakenly assumed coffee shops have the same market dynamics as a restaurant, but coffee is low-staff, low-overhead, and high-profit. So long as people are walking in the door, you'll do okay.
That statistic is absurd, and highly suspect coming from the "Specialty Coffee Association of America". I have run a coffeeshop and restaurant both, and can attest to the high attrition rate in coffeeshop turnover. I'd be surprised if even more than 40% of coffeeshops are still open 3 years after establishment.
Re: The coffeeshop fallacy
#23This is the paradox of capitalism. Focus on creating something inherently good and it will not be sustainable. Focus on creating something sustainable and profitable and it will most likely not be as inherently good as it could be. Example: McDonalds. Brilliant business model. Awful product.
Whoa, whoa, whoa. I'd downvote you if I could, not because I disagree with you, but because this is a strawman. The author used a low margin, low sucess business example to make a point about what mindset someone should be in to successfully run a business. You took from that the message that anything enjoyable is not sustainable. "Focus on creating something inherently good --> it will not be sustainable" You also l…
That something is enjoyable does not make it inherently good (unless you ascribe to Utilitarianism). There are of course other factors beyond pure enjoyment that contribute to the inherent goodness of a thing. You don't need to enjoy a medical device in order for it to be able to do its job well, for example.
Rather, the distinction I was aiming at was between "process" and "product". But I suppose that wasn't very clear. My intention was not to start a flame war on capitalism.
In my opinion a process can be sustainable (and thus very likely profitable), but a product can not. In this case a business model is a process and the thing you put in your mouth (the hamburger) is the product. For the hamburger to be perfect we would need an ever escalating process. Constantly adding more complexity or work to refine the product we can create thus creating an unsustainable process.
If you want to create a hamburger in a sustainable and profitable way. The McDonalds process is most likely one of the best ways to do that. But it will NEVER create a perfect hamburger. The same is of course true with the opposite. A tiny connoisseur coffee shop can conceivably create a perfect cup of coffee and push the boundaries of the state of the art. But it will NEVER be a sustainable process. You need to make compromises in order to achieve that.
Re: The coffeeshop fallacy
#24Without taking anything away from the article, it's worth noting that running a software business absolutely can provide one with a great lifestyle. More so than pretty much any other profession I can think of. The lifestyle I wanted: pretty much as close to zero required work as possible, the ability to do said negligible work from anywhere I feel like parking myself (preferably with good rock climbing), enough mone…
yes, you will be able to own that coffee shop, but you won't want to. being their landlord is a better way to go.
also, i don't think software is viewed as a "high-prestige" profession.
Re: The coffeeshop fallacy
#25This is similar to what was around in the 80's with corporate people and owning a Bed and Breakfast. Many wanted to get away from the stress of corporate america and traded it for owning a B&B in the country. What they found was that running a B&B was obviously much different then staying there as a guest.
"The 1980's was the ideal time when everybody wanted to own an inn, thanks to Bob Newhart," she said. referring to the popular television show that featured Mr. Newhart as a Vermont innkeeper. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/19/realestate/19bandb.html?pa...
Something you like doing everyday and something you like doing occasionally are two different things. As well as something you have to do as opposed to something you can decide to do (like writing comments on HN - imagine if it was your job to do it 8 hours a day 5 days a week or more..)
Re: The coffeeshop fallacy
#26Similar to the coffeeshop fallacy is something I described to a friend over dinner the other night as the "ambulance fallacy" ... He was telling me about his startup ambitions and about one particular business that he said sounded like a ton of fun (it was an alcoholic beverage business) - he loved the lifestyle potential of being "that guy". I told him a story about how I wanted to be an EMS worker when I was 12 yea…
This is similar to how I talked my brother out of his brief thoughts of becoming a professional pilot. It sounds wonderful, but in reality the pay is poor (unless you're one of the lucky few able to work their way up to a good long-haul route), a lot of it is boring, a single relatively harmless medical problem can end your career, etc. etc.
You have to look at the bad parts of any job when considering a career or starting a business, and it seems to be something that people are bad at doing.
Re: The coffeeshop fallacy
#27This is the paradox of capitalism. Focus on creating something inherently good and it will not be sustainable. Focus on creating something sustainable and profitable and it will most likely not be as inherently good as it could be. Example: McDonalds. Brilliant business model. Awful product.
Why am I being down voted for this? It is not spam and not intended as flame bait. It is not off topic and it is not pointless humor. It is a serious comment that needs to be debated and not hidden away at the bottom of the page.
I am not stating anything extremely controversial, simply the same thing the article is stating, but with a slightly different wording.
Don't down vote me because you disagree with me or because you think I am bashing capitalism (I am not, I love capitalism). If you think my argument is weak or lacking, please tell me so in a comment instead.
Re: The coffeeshop fallacy
#28This is the paradox of capitalism. Focus on creating something inherently good and it will not be sustainable. Focus on creating something sustainable and profitable and it will most likely not be as inherently good as it could be. Example: McDonalds. Brilliant business model. Awful product.
McDonalds quality control is second to none. Their standard menu tastes practically the same everywhere in the world. It's the same with Starbucks. I know that no matter what part of the planet I am at, I can get exactly what I expect to get. I'm never disappointed. I can't stress how important that part is. Bad quality control can really injure restaurants.
Perfect consistency is only useful if your perfectly consistent product is any good. Much depends on your target audience. Bad quality control can hurt a lot, but so can perfect consistency in producing a bad product. If your audience is the sort that thinks McDonald's is quality food then that's obviously where you should aim, but many audiences don't.
Re: The coffeeshop fallacy
#29Similar to the coffeeshop fallacy is something I described to a friend over dinner the other night as the "ambulance fallacy" ... He was telling me about his startup ambitions and about one particular business that he said sounded like a ton of fun (it was an alcoholic beverage business) - he loved the lifestyle potential of being "that guy". I told him a story about how I wanted to be an EMS worker when I was 12 yea…
"Don't get caught up by the lights and sirens." - this is great.
That being said, if you know about the lights and sirens and still choose that path, maybe that's the path for you after all. i.e. - you can't build a business without doing the boring stuff as well as the fun stuff.
Re: The coffeeshop fallacy
#30This is the paradox of capitalism. Focus on creating something inherently good and it will not be sustainable. Focus on creating something sustainable and profitable and it will most likely not be as inherently good as it could be. Example: McDonalds. Brilliant business model. Awful product.
Why am I being down voted for this? It is not spam and not intended as flame bait. It is not off topic and it is not pointless humor. It is a serious comment that needs to be debated and not hidden away at the bottom of the page. I am not stating anything extremely controversial, simply the same thing the article is stating, but with a slightly different wording. Don't down vote me because you disagree with me or bec…
You are making a much bolder claim than the article, a very specious claim to boot (that for some reason sustainable businesses can't do good work), and you are not providing any supporting evidence for this controversial claim. You may not have meant it as a troll, but the effect is very similar
The article is just saying that running an X business means you spend a lot more of your time on the "running a business" part than the X part, for any value of X. It doesn't mean you can't do a good job at X — just that you get to enjoy X more as a consumer than a producer.