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

The Myth of the Product-Market Fit (2013)

blog.nishantsoni.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 68 posts

Re: The Myth of the Product-Market Fit (2013)

#41

Post by carbine »

stackghost wrote: post #8

>Even if you are able to categorically claim PMF, it doesn't guarantee business success. There are a fair number of startups that are able to build out their product, raise investor funding, and gain early traction, only to peter out and never reach growth stages. To me it seems obvious that these startups achieved PMF only in a small subset of their target market. That is, they misidentified the market in which they…

A great many things can still go wrong, even with a great product and PMF. The business economics don't work. The leadership make some catastrophic decisions. A competitor eats your lunch. Etc etc etc.

Re: The Myth of the Product-Market Fit (2013)

#43

Post by jbs789 »

Going back to the original post, it sounds like the central argument is that as a VC investor, you care about the size of the market, which I read as the opportunity to massively scale. Then getting the right product into that market.

So I think that’s pretty valid from a VC investor perspective. Doesn’t mean that some other approach isn’t better by some other metric. Just that a VC investor is looking for those massive returns on a few investments to make up for the losses on the majority. It’s such a skewed distribution if you don’t believe in the ability to sell a product into a massive market then it’s not a VC deal.

Lots of great businesses find some demand for their product and do just fine, or great.

Re: The Myth of the Product-Market Fit (2013)

#44

Post by waprin »

nine_k wrote: post #3
4pkjai wrote: post #2

Another PMF-inspired practice in vogue is using Google Adwords to channel keyword searches to a dummy product site listing various features. The idea is to establish PMF before even beginning work on the product. A certain click-through rate establishes a clear need and a ready market to consume the product. I've always disliked this strategy. It doesn't feel good to start off your relationship with a customer with d…

It should not be deception. The landing page should say: "We are building this product, but it's in the early stages. Leave us your email if you're interested to learn about its progress and availability before your competitors do. Early adopters will get discounts / free plans." If this page gains any traction, subscriptions, interest expressed via the "Contact us" page, then the product is likely worth building pas…

> "Early adopters will get discounts / free plans."

If you include this then you're not even validating to the extent that you think you are. Because you're validating that people will sign up to use it for a discount / free, which doesn't necessarily mean anyone will pay full price for it.

Re: The Myth of the Product-Market Fit (2013)

#45

Post by navaed01 »

This article misses the mark on what product market fit is supposed to represent. It’s one factor among many. It also seems to misunderstand how to identify.

Just like becoming an Olympic athlete, inate skill is helpful but not enough, you need drive, environment etc.

On a more meta note, I’m starting to see more substacks that that publish content that generally do not ‘add value’. That don’t either address an actual reality or meaningfully subvert a common idea. Maybe it’s just me?

Re: The Myth of the Product-Market Fit (2013)

#46

Post by IAmGraydon »

> The fundamental premise of Marc's original post is that PMF is a discrete event and the journey of a company can be thought of as pre-PMF and post-PMF.

I've literally never heard anyone else say this about PMF. Companies change, products change, competition changes and markets change. Your degree of PMF is ever-changing.

Re: The Myth of the Product-Market Fit (2013)

#47

Post by j45 »

I'm not sure if it's a myth. Just because we don't know how doesn't mean it's not possible.

It is not easy, but the more domain experience you have through interactions with problems of customers, the increased likelihood of uncovering pain and demand.

On the other hand, trying to create something, and then try to generate demand for it, or find a fit for it is much harder to find product-market fit, because it wasn't started with that in mind.

Re: The Myth of the Product-Market Fit (2013)

#48

Post by j45 »

IAmGraydon wrote: post #46

> The fundamental premise of Marc's original post is that PMF is a discrete event and the journey of a company can be thought of as pre-PMF and post-PMF. I've literally never heard anyone else say this about PMF. Companies change, products change, competition changes and markets change. Your degree of PMF is ever-changing.

Very possible. The market can grow and you can grow with it. But what is in market (including your ability to grow with demands) can be a part of PMF.

Re: The Myth of the Product-Market Fit (2013)

#49

Post by usernamed7 »

4pkjai wrote: post #2

Another PMF-inspired practice in vogue is using Google Adwords to channel keyword searches to a dummy product site listing various features. The idea is to establish PMF before even beginning work on the product. A certain click-through rate establishes a clear need and a ready market to consume the product. I've always disliked this strategy. It doesn't feel good to start off your relationship with a customer with d…

There are ways to do this that are sleazy, slimey and sneaky. And there are ways to do this that are genuine. What and how you communicate to potential customers matters a lot. But this is one of the best way to develop startups.

Re: The Myth of the Product-Market Fit (2013)

#50

Post by svnt »

wslh wrote: post #39
lowkey wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully disagree with this comment “At the core of PMF is the idea that you are producing something novel in some business and/or technical aspect, NOT that your are selling a product or service that already exists and PMF is there. For example, if you want to compete with Salesforce you already know there is a PMF, it is a CRM!” PMF is not about building something novel. It is about ensuring your product solves…

I am glad to continue the discussion and narrow it as much as possible: Please forget the "novel" meaning for a while, and let's continue with the CRM example. I am a Hubspot customer now. As most companies we have used spreadsheets, vTiger [1], SugarCRM [2], among other apps. My main point was that if they are not/were succesful by the HN startup definition is because they had issues in the GTM not in PMF and this i…

You are essentially saying that some people oversimplify and equate traction, GTM, and PMF.

As you note, lack of PMF can be a reason why there isn’t traction, but it isn’t the only reason.

You can have a good GTM and good PMF and still have poor traction for a number of reasons.

Ultimately failure or success often comes down to traction, which is all of GTM, PMF, and customer retention/expansion working.

Post reply on HN