Lecture 13: How to Be a Great Founder

Post by AndrewKemendo » Wed, Nov 05, 2014, 4:43 PM UTC

scobar wrote: post #17

I found it very interesting when he spoke about founders who've learned to mimic an attribute investors find important. He notes that ignoring a single investor's feedback is fine, but ignoring the world in general is usually disaster. I imagine the rise of this sort of mimicry leads investors who previously would consider investing in an idea and seemingly great founders to more strongly favor traction. I wonder if…

Post by jlukanta » Wed, Nov 05, 2014, 5:39 PM UTC

read wrote: post #8

Some of my takeaways: "Product distribution is more important than what the product is." It's not enough to be contrarian. You should also be right. "It's useful to be able to recognize whether you are on track or not. To have both that belief, but also paranoia, about am I tracking over my investment thesis." You need to be able to articulate the vision well. One of the founders needs to be able to build networks of…

Post by AndrewKemendo » Wed, Nov 05, 2014, 7:52 PM UTC

scobar wrote: post #24

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I imagine the rise of this sort of mimicry leads investors who previously would consider investing in an idea and seemingly great founders to more strongly favor traction. Not sure if you came to that conclusion inductively or deductively based on experience, but it is basically 100% the case. Every potential investor we have spoken with doesn't really seem to care about anything but traction.

I've just recently begun learning about the startup world, so I have almost no experience. Unfortunately, this result will restrict those who don't already know and cannot afford the time to learn how to build a prototype. Thankfully, the effort required to get a software prototype built has been dropping significantly.

Post by scobar » Wed, Nov 05, 2014, 9:13 PM UTC

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #25

scobar wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've just recently begun learning about the startup world, so I have almost no experience. Unfortunately, this result will restrict those who don't already know and cannot afford the time to learn how to build a prototype. Thankfully, the effort required to get a software prototype built has been dropping significantly.

Prototypes /= traction so that almost won't help either. I had a prototype two years ago. Nobody cared. We had an MVP a year ago, nobody cared. Now we are out there actively selling and even then investors are saying: We want to see that you will have 1MM in revenue in the next 12 months before we decide. A rule of thumb in fundraising is this: "When you don't need money you will be able to get it."

Post by AndrewKemendo » Thu, Nov 06, 2014, 1:45 AM UTC

scobar wrote: post #27

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prototypes /= traction so that almost won't help either. I had a prototype two years ago. Nobody cared. We had an MVP a year ago, nobody cared. Now we are out there actively selling and even then investors are saying: We want to see that you will have 1MM in revenue in the next 12 months before we decide. A rule of thumb in fundraising is this: "When you don't need money you will be able to get it."

I agree that a prototype /= traction, but it is a necessary step to get traction. I understand that marketing/sales are necessary to expose the product to target users, but a prototype allows founders to reiterate based on feedback to build what people want. I agree with your rule of thumb too. One analogy that best described it IMO goes something like, "Investors are there to throw gas on the fire, not ignite it."