Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to pick startup ideas

defmacro.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 83 posts

Re: How to pick startup ideas

#31

Post by vinceguidry »

frandroid wrote: post #22
vinceguidry wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found the article great in forcing me to reconsider my goals in that space. I'd always had this belief that it was possible, eventually, to find the right idea and break through and become the next Microsoft / Google / Apple. The more I actually understand about the broader economic environment, and the more I read about the people in question who started these companies, the more it just looks like right-place-rig…

> the more it just looks like right-place-right-time luck That's confirmation bias. There are tons more people than you know of in the right-place-right-time, but couldn't/wouldn't act on it. You still have to build the start up and be persistent at it, have the right vision, do the right adjustments when competition comes around. These are also features shared by the Microsoft / Google / Apples out there.

> There are tons more people than you know of in the right-place-right-time, but couldn't/wouldn't act on it.

So, right-place-right-time-right-preparation? Boils down the same way, just with an added dimension.

Re: How to pick startup ideas

#32

Post by shinamee »

== Paradoxically, the solution is to stop thinking of startup ideas in terms of solving problems in the early stages of startup germination, and instead start thinking in terms of changes in the economic environment and the opportunities these changes unlock. ==

strong point, exactly what I have been thinking lately while trying to understand every single products Google acquires. I still think there are rooms for innovation.

Re: How to pick startup ideas

#33

Post by graphene »

Excellent essay. I feel like the emphasis on "the story" reinforces pmarca's point in his "product market fit" article (http://web.stanford.edu/class/ee204/ProductMarketFit.html): that more important than the team or the idea is the market (in coffeemug's words: the environment).

You can obviously screw up a great market -- and that has been done, and not infrequently -- but assuming the team is baseline competent and the product is fundamentally acceptable, a great market will tend to equal success and a poor market will tend to equal failure. Market matters most.

And neither a stellar team nor a fantastic product will redeem a bad market.

Re: How to pick startup ideas

#34

Post by coffeemug »

graphene wrote: post #33

Excellent essay. I feel like the emphasis on "the story" reinforces pmarca's point in his "product market fit" article ( http://web.stanford.edu/class/ee204/ProductMarketFit.html ): that more important than the team or the idea is the market (in coffeemug's words: the environment). You can obviously screw up a great market -- and that has been done, and not infrequently -- but assuming the team is baseline competent…

The whole essay is really a rip off of pmarca's product/market fit argument, and Peter Thiel's contrarian but right argument. I just rewrote it through the lens of my own experience.

The only truly new thing that I discovered was the "story" bit. I haven't heard that anywhere else before.

Re: How to pick startup ideas

#35

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

tjradcliffe wrote: post #25
frandroid wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the more it just looks like right-place-right-time luck That's confirmation bias. There are tons more people than you know of in the right-place-right-time, but couldn't/wouldn't act on it. You still have to build the start up and be persistent at it, have the right vision, do the right adjustments when competition comes around. These are also features shared by the Microsoft / Google / Apples out there.

It's not an either/or: almost every successful company requires both hard work and luck. In very rare cases one or the other might be sufficient, but in the vast majority of cases both are necessary. The amount of luck required can be reduced by hard work, but it can't be taken to zero. In the usual case, picking a product that turns out to have high demand is the biggest area where luck matters. There are two kinds…

I'd question whether 'everyone knows' how to do smartphones, or social networking, or any number of other innovations. The winners in these fields prove the opposite - hardly anyone knows how to do these things well enough to keep growing a customer base.

I still find an inexplicable number of startups apparently unaware of the critical importance of market-building and networking.

A poor product marketed well will always outcompete a better product marketed badly - or not at all - as long as it has acceptably basic functionality and isn't completely unfit for purpose.

There are so many examples of this in tech it's baffling that it doesn't seem to be considered more often.

And I think the article is just plain wrong about innovation, because in fact there's a constant stream of possible new innovations. The stream comes in waves, but anyone who isn't thinking about what's going to be possible soon isn't paying attention.

'If it was possible someone else would have done it by now' is a Dilbert argument, not one based on evidence.

What doesn't exist is a constant stream of opportunities with instant Apple/Google/FB/MS earning potential.

But these corps got big in many steps, which included choices about products and services, marketing and ecosystem building, customer lock-in, brand management, investor relations, management culture, and worker culture.

They didn't just make a thing and instantly kill the rest of the market because it was just that awesome.

Re: How to pick startup ideas

#36

Post by davemel37 »

nostrademons wrote: post #21
davemel37 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, PR and third party validation will build a brand, not advertising. I do agree that the person who wins the perception of being first in peoples minds will win the branding battle...but I do not agree that the second place competitors won't build strong, viable companies. In fact, there are many examples of big brands being overtaken by smart positioning. Avis claimed, "we are number two so we try ha…

In my experience, rental cars are commodities. I search on their websites for the lowest price and go with that. On my last 4 trips I have used all four of Avis, Hertz, National, and Enterprise. If they're trying to build a brand, they suck at it. (I guess that what they have managed to do is distinguish themselves from no-name budget operators...I wouldn't really consider going with a rental car I haven't heard of,…

You are right, They are commodities, and commodities are where branding matters most.

I guess I should differentiate two types of brands. There are category defining brands (i.e. Kleenex, Xerox, Google) and there are recognizable brands.

The fact that you dont differentiate between avis, hertz, enterprise, and national, but exclude rent-a-wreck, which is almost always cheaper tells me that the commodity you are convinced you buy in price, is in fact driven by your perception of those brands.

Being first in peoples minds is the BEST way to build a brand, but it's not the only way. The fact that Enterprise overtook Hertz as number one, even though they were late to the game...and the fact that you don't buy from only one brand, tells me that being first mover is not the only way to win a market.

Although,to be fair, enterprise was a first mover in the "central business district" car rentals.

I guess my point is that every business has the opportunity to define themselves in their own category, regardless of market conditions. That is the job of your branding. To create the perception that you are first.

Re: How to pick startup ideas

#37

Post by [deleted] »

nostrademons wrote: post #21
davemel37 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, PR and third party validation will build a brand, not advertising. I do agree that the person who wins the perception of being first in peoples minds will win the branding battle...but I do not agree that the second place competitors won't build strong, viable companies. In fact, there are many examples of big brands being overtaken by smart positioning. Avis claimed, "we are number two so we try ha…

In my experience, rental cars are commodities. I search on their websites for the lowest price and go with that. On my last 4 trips I have used all four of Avis, Hertz, National, and Enterprise. If they're trying to build a brand, they suck at it. (I guess that what they have managed to do is distinguish themselves from no-name budget operators...I wouldn't really consider going with a rental car I haven't heard of,…

[deleted]

Re: How to pick startup ideas

#38

Post by [deleted] »

inthewoods wrote: post #2

Interesting article - a lot of good stuff in it but I found it a bit to general to be really useful. As an example, the author states: "So you need to get to market with a viable product before anyone else does." That's the type of statement that I question - there are plenty of examples of companies creating products in saturated markets where they were not the first mover. In fact, sometime being a first mover can…

[deleted]

Re: How to pick startup ideas

#39

Post by levlandau »

I agree with the statement that startups are like biological organisms evolving in the broth of an economic environment. In @pmarca's words "the market needs to be fulfilled and the market will be fulfilled". Once we move on from this fact (that we can't create startups out of thin air without there being an underlying wave ...without a "why now"), the rest of the actionable advice here will work better for an investor and/or the entrepreneur who views herself more as an investor than say a hacker. Alternative advice is to "live in the future" as PG would say it or to be different as Peter Thiel would imply. What I think this means is to ask yourself how similar what you do for fun/ for projects is to what everyone else is doing[similar --> bad]. How often do you work on that stuff? Do you collaborate with people? I am convinced ideas emerge as a natural consequence of working on ideas at the fringe with interesting people. What is hard is a) working on ideas and b) finding interesting people to work with. Another thing that doesn't help is committing to a company prematurely. Easier said than done, but i think if we as entrepreneurs took it a little less serious...we'd net out with more successful companies.
Post reply on HN