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

Well, We Failed – Wattage is shutting down

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 163 posts

Re: Well, We Failed – Wattage is shutting down

#141

Post by javawizard »

pbreit wrote: post #85
merb wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really stupid what you are saying. Some people live with $25k per 10 years... Not everybody is rich or knows rich people. You just need to be smart to start a good company. Also only the "american" style starts with huge amount of money and burns it. It's not always good to just "fail-fast". Sometimes business needs some time, time to grow, not just "put a lot of money in it and if nobody likes it it will die."

> Some people live with $25k per 10 years. Not sure what that means or how it's relevant. > You just need to be smart to start a good company. Short answer is, No. Longer answer is, if you're really smart a) you realize what I said is true and b) you'd figure out a way to raise the money.

> you'd figure out a way to raise the money

They do. They go to VCs.

Re: Well, We Failed – Wattage is shutting down

#142

Post by URSpider94 »

karambahh wrote: post #87
pbreit wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of those investors would get a board seat. Yes, your breakdown is both preferable and more likely. But my point stands.

Your point stands, however, I didn't mean "board" management literally. I should have said "shareholders management". I'm not entirely familiar with US corporate law, but on roman based civil law, 10 investors with 25K of seed capital (ie non trivial amount of % votes) can get messy. (although we did create a board with the breakdown I suggested, because we were lucky to pick the "right" FoaF investors, attorneys and…

Under U.S. corporation law, shareholders have very little ability to affect corporate management, unless they own a large enough stake to impact board elections. In a start-up valued at $1MM post-money, these 10 angels are not going to own more than a couple percent each, while the founders will control 75 percent of the company. The founders will have more than enough voting control, assuming they vote together, to ignore the investors.

Re: Well, We Failed – Wattage is shutting down

#143

Post by pbreit »

URSpider94 wrote: post #142
karambahh wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your point stands, however, I didn't mean "board" management literally. I should have said "shareholders management". I'm not entirely familiar with US corporate law, but on roman based civil law, 10 investors with 25K of seed capital (ie non trivial amount of % votes) can get messy. (although we did create a board with the breakdown I suggested, because we were lucky to pick the "right" FoaF investors, attorneys and…

Under U.S. corporation law, shareholders have very little ability to affect corporate management, unless they own a large enough stake to impact board elections. In a start-up valued at $1MM post-money, these 10 angels are not going to own more than a couple percent each, while the founders will control 75 percent of the company. The founders will have more than enough voting control, assuming they vote together, to…

He might be talking about Canadian law which I would admit can be goofy with respect to startups. But I still don't think it's that big a deal.

Re: Well, We Failed – Wattage is shutting down

#146

Post by Animats »

There's a minor industry devoted to customized imagery and colors for consumer product. There are startups set up to serve that market, with online design tools.[1][2]. Custom shoes and sports equipment are doing reasonably well. The T-shirt industry has been doing this for at least half a century. Bain, the consulting firm, has an article on what works in product customization.[3] Basically, let the user tweak minor stuff, but not change much.

None of these companies actually let the user affect product function much. It's all decorative, or sizing-related. Autodesk has gone further, with Autodesk Homestyler, which is a free CAD system for home interiors.[4] This is a descendant of Autodesk Kitchen Designer, which was for sizing kitchen cabinets to fit a kitchen space. This lets you lay out a house, existing or planned, add commercial furniture, and view the house in 3D. Available for desktop, browser, and mobile. Despite being an impressive tool, it's never caught on. Probably because most people are terrified of starting with a blank screen and designing their house.

Carl Bass, the CEO of Autodesk, thinks that user design mods and product customization will be important, but aren't here yet. Autodesk has come out with a range of low-end CAD products. They now have their own 3D printer, and there are things like their 123Catch, for turning sets of pictures into 3D models. The technology is doing fine. But designing your own stuff isn't an instant-gratification thing.

[1] http://www.dogma.com [2] http://www.fluid.com [3] http://www.bain.com/publications/articles/making-it-personal... [4] http://www.homestyler.com/floorplan/

Re: Well, We Failed – Wattage is shutting down

#147

Post by brc »

Animats wrote: post #146

There's a minor industry devoted to customized imagery and colors for consumer product. There are startups set up to serve that market, with online design tools.[1][2]. Custom shoes and sports equipment are doing reasonably well. The T-shirt industry has been doing this for at least half a century. Bain, the consulting firm, has an article on what works in product customization.[3] Basically, let the user tweak minor…

Remember the original business model for Pixar was for it to be a home animation studio, in the same way that people use photoshop to do their own graphics.

I think they had terrible takeup on that and started producing shorts to show how good the technology was.

I think it's the same point - if you can't get instant gratification with something, then the consumer takeup is low.

Re: Well, We Failed – Wattage is shutting down

#149

Post by merb »

javawizard wrote: post #141
pbreit wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some people live with $25k per 10 years. Not sure what that means or how it's relevant. > You just need to be smart to start a good company. Short answer is, No. Longer answer is, if you're really smart a) you realize what I said is true and b) you'd figure out a way to raise the money.

> you'd figure out a way to raise the money They do. They go to VCs.

Or they don't need since their business is making revenue since day 1. Okai maybe not since day 1, but its making revenue. As already said there are also businesses where you don't need any funding. Business 2 Business models mostly don't need that much money with a great idea.

Re: Well, We Failed – Wattage is shutting down

#150

Post by gedrap »

jeremybell wrote: post #97
Retric wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO, the custom radio is not really a terrible idea; the problem was all the pictures where of the same radio with a new paint job. At least make the knobs look like chess pieces, rocket ships, airplanes, or cats etc. Then again who buys radios? Custom clocks seem far more universal and let people use a wider range of shapes.

To some extent, the initial product wasn't important. Yes, it needed to resonate with an audience, but it's sole purpose was to test the waters and prove that we could ship. We liked the radio because it was unique enough that we felt it would stand out. Instead of flipping between AM/FM stations, you'd be flipping between podcasts. I think that would have sold pretty well... or at least well enough for us to prove t…

>>> To some extent, the initial product wasn't important.

I am not sure if I agree with this.

I think a good initial product choice is really important to gain the much needed initial traction.

If the initial product is good, the potential users will resonate with it. They will think 'Yeah! I want it!'. They will think 'Yeah! These could be so much more convenient to use / cooler'. You get the idea.

But nowadays, few people use radios other than a car radio. It's much harder for the users to resonate and see what problem it solves for them.

Post reply on HN