11–20 of 28 posts
> Lesson: Start with selling a Product not a Platform Good advice. People rarely want a platform, especially from a new entrant. They want an aspirin tablet. Once they are hooked you can expand.
A sticky platform will be stickier than a sticky product. But that doesn't mean every product should be made into a platform.
> Lesson: Start with selling a Product not a Platform Good advice. People rarely want a platform, especially from a new entrant. They want an aspirin tablet. Once they are hooked you can expand.
I remember VCs telling me to be a platform, not a product. "Look at what FB is doing!" It made sense for FB, but that doesn't mean it makes sense for everyone. A sticky platform will be stickier than a sticky product. But that doesn't mean every product should be made into a platform.
Except Facebook started as a product.
Can you talk a little more in detail about your tech stack? Perhaps it would help more readers like me who are curious given your history in the .NET space.
Sure! Because of my background in .NET, it made sense to stick with what I know. I don't believe the tech stack makes or breaks a product (unless you choose egregiously poorly). A product's success is primarily determined by how well you hit product market fit. That being said, a good stack that you know well can affect how quickly you build and how quickly you can adapt the product to changing market conditions. So…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember VCs telling me to be a platform, not a product. "Look at what FB is doing!" It made sense for FB, but that doesn't mean it makes sense for everyone. A sticky platform will be stickier than a sticky product. But that doesn't mean every product should be made into a platform.
> "Look at what FB is doing!" It made sense for FB Except Facebook started as a product.
> Lesson: Start with selling a Product not a Platform Good advice. People rarely want a platform, especially from a new entrant. They want an aspirin tablet. Once they are hooked you can expand.
I remember VCs telling me to be a platform, not a product. "Look at what FB is doing!" It made sense for FB, but that doesn't mean it makes sense for everyone. A sticky platform will be stickier than a sticky product. But that doesn't mean every product should be made into a platform.
FB started by “selling” access to the freshman* picture book. They only became a platform later.
* hopefully a less sexist term is used these days.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember VCs telling me to be a platform, not a product. "Look at what FB is doing!" It made sense for FB, but that doesn't mean it makes sense for everyone. A sticky platform will be stickier than a sticky product. But that doesn't mean every product should be made into a platform.
I don’t think you understood my point. Being an advertising platform is good for facebook . But I don’t use FB for that reason (actually it’s a negative) I use it to keep up with my friends and family, and their kids. FB started by “selling” access to the freshman* picture book. They only became a platform later. * hopefully a less sexist term is used these days.
They used to just be an app, and now they have an ecosystem of products (Whatsapp, Instagram, etc.). I wasn't referring to the fact that they also run an advertiser-facing platform at all. I was just pointing out that they started as a single product and have expanded to being a larger platform, with all the network effects/benefits that such growth entails. That's great for them, at that stage.
But it doesn't make sense for all earlier stage products to try to become platforms. To me, the VC was showing a not-uncommon tendency to swing for the fences (or rather, to suggest that an undiversified startup founder should do so).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Look at what FB is doing!" It made sense for FB Except Facebook started as a product.
The VC's point was that FB was moving to be a platform, and I should too (despite having approximately 0% of the number of users that FB had at the time).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure! Because of my background in .NET, it made sense to stick with what I know. I don't believe the tech stack makes or breaks a product (unless you choose egregiously poorly). A product's success is primarily determined by how well you hit product market fit. That being said, a good stack that you know well can affect how quickly you build and how quickly you can adapt the product to changing market conditions. So…
Interesting stack for sure, though that is a solid program from Ms - good luck.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember VCs telling me to be a platform, not a product. "Look at what FB is doing!" It made sense for FB, but that doesn't mean it makes sense for everyone. A sticky platform will be stickier than a sticky product. But that doesn't mean every product should be made into a platform.
I don’t think you understood my point. Being an advertising platform is good for facebook . But I don’t use FB for that reason (actually it’s a negative) I use it to keep up with my friends and family, and their kids. FB started by “selling” access to the freshman* picture book. They only became a platform later. * hopefully a less sexist term is used these days.