[deleted]
Re. No NDAs: What Should Idea People Do?
61–65 of 65 posts
Re: Re. No NDAs: What Should Idea People Do?
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
The grandpost is brilliant. But that comment assumes that ideas and execution are independent variables, which is not the case.
Thanks! Can you expand on this notion that ideas and execution are not independent? What I think you're suggesting is that the act of executing (or attempting to execute) will add data to the process of what is good or bad about a particular idea, and perhaps provide hooks for new thoughts/improvements to that idea. Is this accurate?
Ideas and execution are not independent. For example, it is easier to execute an idea that you believe in rather than one you don't. (In a vacuum it may seem strange to think that someone would execute an idea that they don't believe in, but realize that this happens all the time, perhaps the majority of time). Another example, it is easier to execute an idea which actually has a market - the enthusiasm of customers is infectious and highly motivating. Final example, execution is better when the idea 'goes with the grain' of available technology (if it's a technology idea, of course).
Re: Re. No NDAs: What Should Idea People Do?
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
this does not work so well if you're probably about number 500,000 on the list of people worldwide who could best execute it - but if you do it first, you still have a solid chance of publicity and a reasonable shot at making 10x-100x the investment, and maybe more, combined with an almost inability not to at least get bought out by someone more competent for a mild profit (loss if you consider your personal opportun…
If you've recognized an opportunity earlier than others, you've had more time to think through the problem and its solutions. You've had more opportunity to think about how you can build a business around this solution. And you're probably more apt to forsee further advatanges and problems in that space. Lastly, hopefully, you have a unique take or insight into the problem that sets you apart from a project headed by…
Hi,
You misunderstand. I'm not saying there is active competition. I'm saying, As a programmer, there are close to a million programmers who could execute this better in two weeks then I'm about to in the next month. But I'm still going to execute it over the next month. (Because no one else is doing it.) That means, despite my shitty execution, an idea is enough. No, this attitude won't get you investors. But it can get you something better: customers.
Above, I wasn't talking about actual competition, but your comment "If you concede that it's all in the execution and can't make an argument for why you're the right person to see it executed -- then you've already admitted that you have nothing to offer"
which you wrote in response to: "If the person with a great idea has something (very) substantial to offer a project based upon it then they are clearly a key component of the idea execution and should not fear discussing the idea with potential partners.
If the idea is all someone has then - frankly - no-one will want to listen to the idea in any case."
Basically, I "disagree with" the two quotes above (I don't actually disagree, since it is completely correct: no-one will want to listen to someone who doesn't say they're the best in the world at it).
I am saying that to ACTUALLY succeed (as opposed to convincing someone that you will), you don't have to be able to offer something VERY substantial above the idea. You do NOT have to have ANYTHING that makes you a VERY key player: it's enough to just have an idea and make it barely work, with a solution that there are a million people who COULD do it better in two weeks, but who aren't. I'm saying I don't have to be special or all that good or unique. I just have to have an idea, and it's okay to execute it at a level where if it were a competition with a million entrants (top million coders/teams worldwide) then I would come in 500,000.
Because it's not actually a competition with a million entrants. It's just you executing your idea. It just has to get some customers, it doesn't have to be unique or key or anything else. And often an idea is as simple as follows: There is no one doing x in my geographic area. I will learn PHP over the weekend and start offering x in my geographic area.
People do it, they make money, and they might even get investment after a while. All on a simple idea (no one's doing it here) and a shitty execution. That's the extent to which I disagree with your parent's and your quotes above. I do agree that investors want to hear chest-beating if the project doesn't exist yet, they want to hear about your Stanford and MIT credentials and how you architectured some part of paypal.
But you don't actually need to have that stuff to just do it.
Re: Re. No NDAs: What Should Idea People Do?
#64I'm a pretty big believer in the idea the ideas are emergent phenomena. On creative days, I can average an idea a minute. Most of these are things I've heard already and forgotten (except some small part in the back of my head) or combinations of 2 or 3 comments/blogs or papers or whatever I've read here or elsewhere. Also most of them are crap. An even higher portion of the "original" ones are crap. But the ones tha…
You should really read Napolean Hill's "Think and Grow Rich." Your comment was written by him in the 1920's. He discusses how there are two types of creativity, one comes from applying your knowledge and experiences to other situations, and the other comes from what he calls, "infinite knowledge" that is floating out there and can be tapped into under the right circumstances.
Thanks for the pointer!
Re: Re. No NDAs: What Should Idea People Do?
#65The "no NDA" thing is getting out of hand. NDA's have a time and a place. That place is not when you're meeting someone to talk for the first time. Nobody wants to increase their legal risk for a chance meeting, which will likely not turn into anything interesting - especially contract developers, investors, and the like (whose future business may be impacted by NDA's). The answer is simple: state your idea in terms…
Thank you for using the term "risk". That's how I view it.
Risk of legal exposure. Risk of significant expense to defend myself.
Risk of the individual (me) and his limited resources, versus that of the business with perhaps considerably greater resources. (And in legal disputes, financial resources often trump other positions.)
So no, I'm not interested in your NDA, unless there is something quite tangible and the NDA is carefully limited in scope. AND... it had better be worth my considerable time and effort to confirm this.