> if your product is a wedding cake, your MVP is a single layer I rather prefer the analogy put forward by Intercom: try to cupcake it instead[0], have a finished mini-version of the product instead of just one layer of the full version. I believe the idea is the same as Nikki’s, just the analogy possibly more apt. [0] https://www.intercom.com/blog/start-with-a-cupcake/
I don't personally think any of this is right. A good synonym for "MVP" should be "experiment": you're trying to test something. So a cupcake might be a suitable MVP, but you're either trying to confirm the basic flavour is fine (so single layer is OK), or maybe the combination of flavours is fine (multiple layers plus icing?) or maybe the overall look/design of the cake (in which case a cupcake is wrong, you need at…
As someone who kept throwing out MVPs every few weeks to painfully discouraging indifference, the term "experiment" finally started to make sense - each attempt kept missing a leap-of-faith assumption being tested, so each failure was discouraging instead of enlightening/iterative.
I think first time startup founders incorrectly assume building an MVP is like logically assembling a lego set (one best practice feature + research + user feedback guarantees people using your MVP more than once). When that logic fails, it's a heavy hit mentally.
For example, sure you know that people pay for babysitters - but can YOU get people to pay for babysitters? Pretty sure that breaks all viability if false no matter how fancy the product, so might be a good starting point designing the "minimal" part of your experiment. Educational literature might benefit from less semantics about definitions, and more teachings about what a good MVP attempt #1 looks like.