Live data from Hacker News

How to validate your startup idea quickly

amanjain.substack.com

41–50 of 80 posts

Re: How to validate your startup idea quickly

#41
post #11

This is a neat idea, and there may be some enlightening bits of feedback, but it won't tell you what matters, and that is if people, in a specific audience will like the product. Sign ups and likes are very noisy singals. There's just nothing that can take the place of market validation, so the 'new standard' model of 'release early' is probably the best way. Sometimes it takes a while to find the right user base and…

I agree different levels of "skin in the game" mean different signal. Simple link click is pretty lousy signal and I would ignore it. I think email is okay. Phone number is probably better. Somebody putting their credit card is really good. I didn't mention all of that for brevity. But you could device a point based grading system based on what signal you get.

No, none of those things are 'really good' - because none of them have even tried or looked at the product.

A product is a million bits of detail, impossible to discern in a web page.

If you're selling basic widgets, with basic function - sure. By by and large, software is not that.

Re: How to validate your startup idea quickly

#42
I've done this before, it also appears clearly described in the "Start small stay small book" which I recommend a lot. However after running it I found myself a little lost, conversion was not as expected and it's very hard to realize what failed. Is it the idea? or the design? or the speed of the website? or the wrong target audience? or the wrong keywords?.

More importantly should I jump to my next idea? or should I invest more time pivoting this one and pushing until I get where I want to be.

What happens when you're building an improved version of something that already exist? Would you skip this kind of validation assuming that if people pay for the big product they would pay for a small one? Specially if you're not aiming for a venture backed monster but just a bootstrapped small business.

Re: How to validate your startup idea quickly

#43
Even if slightly unrealistic, I actually think the nicest part is the back of the napkin math and derivation of the numbers to give you context for how big a market is and what you’d need to attack to meet your goals.

I do however have an issue with the wizard of oz method of validating your product. It’s not because of the perceived ethics and I totally understand too many people today build something before ever knowing anything about whether anyone will use or pay for it. Hopefully I didn’t miss it but nowhere does the author discuss the amount of time/people/money it would take to build a working MVP, not to mention how much of your time will be tied up from working on said MVP if you’re oz (i.e. the man or woman behind the curtain until the MVP is built). This is important since it drives how you (or at least I) would move forward: Do you need to quit a full time job and spend 3-6 months 60+ hr/week building your MVP, can you build an MVP in a few weekends, would you need outside help/money to build an MVP, etc etc.

The example in this post mentions a recommendation engine of sorts for individualized fitness programs. This sounds like a fairly high amount of expertise in the field of fitness, some possible AI with trained models sprinkled in and a good amount of curated fitness routine info or I guess individual exercises based on the equipment the user enters that they have. So a lot of time getting with experts (or becoming an expert) AND building a new machine learned model possibly with a nice, usable UI. This sounds like a full time job for 5+ people for 6+ months at least to get any sort of real prototype.

Re: How to validate your startup idea quickly

#44
post #42

I've done this before, it also appears clearly described in the "Start small stay small book" which I recommend a lot. However after running it I found myself a little lost, conversion was not as expected and it's very hard to realize what failed. Is it the idea? or the design? or the speed of the website? or the wrong target audience? or the wrong keywords?. More importantly should I jump to my next idea? or should…

RE: What failed?

Agreed this is a problem that your product needs to solve either way. This idea validation playbook allows you to face the problem early on as opposed to later.

RE: What happens when you're building an improved version?

I'd ask you why you think yours is an improved version? Is that a sure shot fact or up for the market to decide. If it's sure shot, they yeah skip the idea validation step. Sounds like your idea has more execution risk than market risk.

But if you think its subjective, then that's probably something you could find a creative way of solving using the Painted Door test or something similar.

Re: How to validate your startup idea quickly

#46
TLDR; Famous Painted door test: https://briandavidhall.com/the-painted-door-test/

A painted door test lets you gauge interest in a new feature, product, page, or piece of functionality … before you’ve built it. It involves updating your site with a link or callout that promises the new feature, then measuring clicks to see how many visitors would try it if it existed.A painted door test lets you gauge interest in a new feature, product, page, or piece of functionality … before you’ve built it. It involves updating your site with a link or callout that promises the new feature, then measuring clicks to see how many visitors would try it if it existed.A painted door test lets you gauge interest in a new feature, product, page, or piece of functionality … before you’ve built it. It involves updating your site with a link or callout that promises the new feature, then measuring clicks to see how many visitors would try it if it existed.

Re: How to validate your startup idea quickly

#47
post #34

A number of the comments are saying this is bad because from Facebook, numbers are unrealistic ($100mm?!), signs tell you nothing. Personally, I've done startups longer than I want to admit (10+ yrs). If I was to start another one, the play book would look basically like this article. Idea/Thesis, Hypothesis, Target, Test and some where later - build. The problem I had when I started and why so many founders get it w…

Idea/Thesis, Hypothesis, Target, Test and some where later - build. This is a common strategy if you just want to 'do a startup' but it misses the need . Every successful business I can think of started with a founder needing a product to exist. All the startups I've been involved in have been products I wanted to exist because I needed them myself, or I had a close relationship with someone who needed them. Turning…

This is a really good point.

Everything I've built on my own has been something I wanted. In some cases they were more complicated than I thought so I never got to the customer validation stage, but that wasn't quite the disaster it could have been, because cash wasn't the (only) motivation.

Except...when it was, and yeah, my bad. So on the one hand I look back and kick myself for not first probing the market, but then I also remember that I did probe it, found there wasn't one, and didn't really care.

It can be a fine line between building a "me-too" product and something that no one wants.

Re: How to validate your startup idea quickly

#48
post #45

Something I am starting to learn about myself: I don't care if nobody wants it, I still want to build it. Not a great trait for making money as a startup, but it's an itch I just have to keep scratching...

I have the same itch and keep scratching it almost daily. I can say scratching this itch over the last several years has absolutely been +EV overall. Maybe not in a “I made $XXXX in sales over the last month/year/whatever” kind of way but in that I’ve learned an incredible amount, have been able to use a lot of the things I’ve learned at my job and have definitely improved my overall market value as an engineer (validated with data I should say, not just an opinionated, arrogant rant).

That said, I would keep scratching that itch if you still have the motivation and drive to keep learning/building without seeing immediate material value like money right away.

Re: How to validate your startup idea quickly

#49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But... you are not competing with Lewis Hamilton if you stay at the local go kart track! Plenty of room for small fish. He’d love to come and beat you but he can not afford to, his time would cost millions.

And yet I bumped into a childhood hero of mine, Leo Laporte of tech broadcasting fame, at an impromptu meetup he did at a bar in SF I heard about on his Twitter. So as I lived in SF at the time (~2012 I think?), I just went and met one of my role models. Sure, you don’t know if you don’t go. But you also don’t know if you don’t know to go . Can going be taught? Isn’t that what startups do?

Sorry I’m lost in a spiral of metaphor now! Say what?

Re: How to validate your startup idea quickly

#50

I started reading the post but the moment I saw big numbers in hypothesis I felt like the author has no clue how hard reality is. Facebook is a great cocoon to try random numbers. Outside that founders take months to even find the right set of people who fit your need space. Just talk , generally, about pains you are trying to solve. Everything else is quite unnecessary. Did you know that even founder of Zapier had t…

I'm trying to understand your feedback. Perhaps I'm missing something. The point of the big numbers in my post is not to look at them in absolute terms. But to look at the ratio A/B. And then apply it to a much smaller audience. Because that tells helps validate that your idea will meet your expectations (whatever they may be).

I read the comments first, and then eagerly read your post - because I hate Facebook and wanted to scorn you, but having read it I see that it's not really Facebook-centric at all, containing only a glancing reference.

That said, I do think there are problems with your use of statistics and you kind of do need to consider the numbers in absolute terms. If I check my idea out with ten people I know in my target demographic, and five of them like it, I probably shouldn't expect 50% of the target market will be interested in my idea. My sample size is too small and also not really representative of the demographic because there is a selection bias at play - they're people I know, so maybe I know the only five people in the world who have the same problem I'm trying to sovle.

Likewise, in your example, you talk about showing a concept to people on a Facebook social group, but people on a Facebook social group aren't really representative of your target demographic either. "Only 20 bucks a month? Sounds great, I love interacting with apps!" may be something a Facebook engineer would say, but that may be less likely from the mouth of the average 25-44 year old.

I do think testing your ideas out and seeing how users respond to them is a good practice but there is inherently danger to doing tests and coming up with statistics if you believe your own tests. You might run the experiments you describe and feel good about your numbers and invest time and money to go to a wider audience only to find out that a lot of people think 20 dollars a month is too expensive for an app that gives workout advice (which, I predict, I could find on the current app store for free) or that they don't like working out at home or from an app, etc.

If you know you don't know what's ahead you'll proceed cautiously. If you falsely believe you know what is ahead due to biased statistics or insufficient sample sizes, you may blunder painfully.

I also caught a few references to Thiel's "Zero to one" in there, but I feel the approach you're describing, at least the hypothetical example, is somewhat contradictory to the advice in that book. I'd characterize your approach as:

1. figure out the market - (Big number, everyone interested in fitness)

2. guess what piece you can serve - (small number - only 2% need to try!)

3. figure out if you can serve them - (small number - maybe 10% retention)

In other words, "We just need a small piece of this big market!"

From Zero to One:

>Now I think the opposite version of this is always where you have super big markets and there is so many different things that went wrong with all the clean tech companies in the last decade. But the one theme than ran through almost all of them is that they all started with massive markets. Every clean tech powerpoint presentation that one saw in the years 2005 to 2008, which is the clean tech bubble in Silicon Valley, started with where the energy market, where the market was measured in hundreds and billions of trillions of dollars. And then once you're sort of like a minnow in a vast ocean, that is not a good place to be. That means you have tons of competitors and you don’t even know who all the competitors are.

>You want to be a one of a kind company. You want to be the only player in a small ecosystem. You don’t want to be the fourth online pet food company. You don’t want to be the tenth solar panel company. You don’t want to be the hundredth restaurant in Palo Alto. Your restaurant industry is a trillion dollar industry. So if you do a market size analysis, you conclude restaurants are fantastic business to go into. And often large existing markets typically means that you have tons of competitions so it's very very hard to differentiate. The first very counterintuitive idea is to go after small markets, markets that are so small people often don't even think that they make sense. That's where you get a foothold and then if those markets are able expand, you can scale into a big monopoly business.

In other words, if I looked at "2% of people who saw my Facebook post left their email" I'd probably think the same thing I'd think prior to doing any experiment, which is "There is a lot of fitness stuff, including apps and gyms, this probably won't work". But, I'm also a pessimist, so maybe that's just me.

Anywho - sorry if I've been too negative. I did enjoy reading your post, and I hope you hit the target numbers you want on your substack subscriptions from this post! :)

Post reply on HN