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

Startup Common Sense

42floors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 50 posts

Re: Startup Common Sense

#41

Post by benologist »

namenotrequired wrote: post #32
benologist wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be very difficult to for any service to have no audience on HN, not because HN is relevant to whatever they're peddling but because HN has a large audience . Startups pooping out startup-fluff advertisement-articles chasing that precious 0.x% clickthrough rates to their homepage is boring and a stupid 'plan b' for growing your business. Companies that actually have relevance to this community have no problem…

Those companies are relevant to almost all of us because they're (at least partly) B2C. 42floors is B2B, they rely on lower quantities of customers that each pay more. In other words, it's not that the majority of us are in the target audience of 42floors. But a large portion of the people they do want to target - people that want to or are starting a startup - do happen to be here. It's like precision vs. recall. Th…

I don't think that's accurate at all. Startups are just a small subset of companies that require office space. On top of that startups looking for office space are an even smaller subset, and those who have founders or employees lurking on HN an additional step down the funnel. People who "want" to start a startup are even further removed from requiring office space. This is rounding error stuff.

The reason the companies I mentioned have actual and natural 'hn marketshare' isn't because they're b2c vs b2b (which is incorrect anyway), it's because they actually do provide tools, services, platforms etc that HN users in enormous numbers need/want/use.

Re: Startup Common Sense

#42

Post by 7Figures2Commas »

aagha wrote: post #33
7Figures2Commas wrote: post #2

Here's some common sense: if you're the CEO of a startup, you should be focused on your own company. Period. This might come off as overly harsh, but it's absolutely true: taking 45-plus minutes out of your day to engage in an "argumentative" call with "the brother of a friend" who has a "world-changing idea" is a waste of time. As is blogging about it. Your job as CEO is not to advise other entrepreneurs or to preac…

"Your job as CEO is not to advise other entrepreneurs..." Wow. What a sad comment to read. Being a CEO means being a leader, and not just of those that work for you, but to serve as a leader and thus guide others that are trying to trek the same path you've taken (and might re-take).

I am speaking from experience. I once co-founded a company, now-defunct, and while serving as president of the company, was a formal advisor to another company. I think I provided a lot of value to the other company, and I absolutely learned from the experience.

However, in retrospect, I concluded that serving as an advisor to another company while I was building a new company of my own was not a good decision. Did taking the time to advise another company have a material impact on the outcome for my company? I don't believe so, but I can never know either. And that's the thing: when you start a business, win or lose you should always put yourself in a position where you can look back and know that 100% of the hours you made available to your work life were dedicated to the right effort.

Re: Startup Common Sense

#43

Post by 7Figures2Commas »

ulisesrmzroche wrote: post #35
7Figures2Commas wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you choose to be the CEO of a company and you hire employees, you're no longer just working for yourself. How a CEO spends his time means everything to the company and its employees. I don't know how you would you feel if you worked at the OP's startup, but I would have a problem with the notion that the person ultimately responsible for making payroll found it worthwhile and enjoyable to spend 45-plus minutes d…

You don't practice what you preach, dude. How is this helping you make payroll?

I don't have payroll to make, dude.

Re: Startup Common Sense

#44

Post by 3327 »

AsymetricCom wrote: post #27
startupstella wrote: post #17

I love this post because everyone in this community takes the Lean Startup truths to be self evident, however, the rest of the 99% still ascribe to truths that are unbelievably archaic. I see this all the time in bschool (luckily bschool entrepreneurship curriculums are teaching Lean methods now) as well as on matchist, where the #1 question entrepreneurs ask me when they submit a project is: "How do I make sure deve…

According to recent YC posts, we should be more worried about venture capitalists stealing ideas.

Great post, to us here some things are evident but there is another world out there perhaps 4.2 lightyears away or perhaps closer. But in this world things accepted as norms, like logical argument, validating, hard data are not the norm, and its common-sense or "what i know is right" is the norm. Its baffling and this post was a great eye opener, as we are stuck in the four walls that we have built around ourselves sometimes and forget to peer outside...

Re: Startup Common Sense

#45

Post by btilly »

tieTYT wrote: post #39
btilly wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Minecraft was publicly released as an early alpha in 2009, and there was not a full release until 2011. Thisstands as an example proving that a clearly unfinished game can be released and iterated into a much better game than the developer could have created in isolation. The trick was that the state was described honestly. It was offered cheaply. Upgrades were always free, but the next version always cost more. This…

Do you happen to know if he charged from the get-go?

When I heard about it he was charging on a known sliding scale. I don't know about the start, but I suspect it came fast.

Re: Startup Common Sense

#46

Post by adamzerner »

He shouldn't have stopped talking about the conversation with the lawyer. There were interesting disagreements there that I would have liked to hear him expand on, and say why exactly he disagrees. For example, he said that he enjoyed the conversation because it forced him to better articulate what he previously just assumed to be true.

Re: Startup Common Sense

#47

Post by dd36 »

I do not understand the current open book orthodoxy. I have friends that have launched very successful startups that were extremely secretive prior to launch. I do not see why it should be a generalized statement.

If you know how to do due diligence and come from a background in business, why do you need to be open with everyone about what you're working on? Yes, if you're a young kid and green behind the ears, you should probably not be too secretive. But you can talk to a handful of trusted, knowledgeable people without needing to be completely open with everybody you meet.

Does 42 Floors write blog posts about all of their ideas and everything that they are developing? Maybe they do, I don't know. As soon as they have real competitors, they will stop - or maybe they will not and I think that decision will be a function of market position. If 42 Floors has an unshakeable market position, they will be as open as can be. If there is a threat and they've lost considerable marketshare to that threat, they will be less open about the competitive ideas they have going forward IMO.

We're working on a company right now that has competitors that, if they had the eureka moment that we have had, would run with it. There is no reason to even risk exposing them to our ideas. So we speak in very broad terms when we discuss what we are working on.

I am going to do some more reading but I do not understand the mentality of share all of your ideas openly and everything will be okay.

Can someone please ELI5 the logic underlying this orthodoxy?

Thanks and I post this with all due respect. It's not an attack. It's a confused man typing in public.

Re: Startup Common Sense

#48

Post by dd36 »

dd36 wrote: post #47

I do not understand the current open book orthodoxy. I have friends that have launched very successful startups that were extremely secretive prior to launch. I do not see why it should be a generalized statement. If you know how to do due diligence and come from a background in business, why do you need to be open with everyone about what you're working on? Yes, if you're a young kid and green behind the ears, you s…

I should add: we will talk openly with people that we know and trust without a NDA but we are not going to walk around at a conference and spill the beans to strangers. They will be guarded conversations that remain in the realm of generalizations - and probably not even reveal our most exciting concepts.

Why don't stock traders tell other stock traders about positions they want to take before they've built their positions? Yes, I know the barriers are lower but unless you're enough down the road in building your product/position, why would you plant the seed of your idea in somebody else's mind?

I think the key qualifier is: have you done anything yet beyond come up with an idea? If you have not done anything but talk, then being secretive is pretty pointless. If your idea is in motion and will be to market sooner than later, talking about it openly is not a big deal.

Re: Startup Common Sense

#49

Post by Ma8ee »

dd36 wrote: post #47

I do not understand the current open book orthodoxy. I have friends that have launched very successful startups that were extremely secretive prior to launch. I do not see why it should be a generalized statement. If you know how to do due diligence and come from a background in business, why do you need to be open with everyone about what you're working on? Yes, if you're a young kid and green behind the ears, you s…

1. Ideas are a dime a dozen. Your idea is most likely not nearly as unique or revolutionary as you think. Most people you tell it to will probably be neutral to negative, and the chance that you will tell it to someone that both thinks it is an excellent idea and have the resources in time and money to follow through on it is exceedingly slim.

2. You need the invaluable input from other people. Maybe your idea is crap, maybe it has already been tried, maybe no one is prepared to pay to solve that particular problem, maybe someone else is already doing whatever you want to do successfully and are years ahead of you. You better get to know these things before you spend 18 months coding in your basement.

Re: Startup Common Sense

#50

Post by dd36 »

Ma8ee wrote: post #49
dd36 wrote: post #47

I do not understand the current open book orthodoxy. I have friends that have launched very successful startups that were extremely secretive prior to launch. I do not see why it should be a generalized statement. If you know how to do due diligence and come from a background in business, why do you need to be open with everyone about what you're working on? Yes, if you're a young kid and green behind the ears, you s…

1. Ideas are a dime a dozen. Your idea is most likely not nearly as unique or revolutionary as you think. Most people you tell it to will probably be neutral to negative, and the chance that you will tell it to someone that both thinks it is an excellent idea and have the resources in time and money to follow through on it is exceedingly slim. 2. You need the invaluable input from other people. Maybe your idea is cra…

And both those arguments apply to people that don't know how to do due diligence or lack significant experience in the industry that they are addressing. Somebody could be working on your idea in total stealth and unveil it tomorrow. It's impossible to have perfect due diligence in a non-transparent world. Yes, if you lack experience, you should definitely talk to a lot of people, especially prospective users.

What we are working on currently is a spin off of an existing company that we already run and we've spoken to numerous other users about it. It's a solution to a common problem in a particular industry that nobody has appropriately addressed. Until we launch, I do not see the wisdom of telling strangers what we are working on. There are existing very large companies that have certain pieces in place and if they had the insight that we do, could devote resources and beat us to the punch. Sometimes there is value in blindsiding your competition.

I simply disagree with complete openness as a universal rule. Maybe because of egos it's better to be open more often than not but it should be a carefully considered modus operandi.

We will be launching within 6 months and already are alpha-ing with users. You can take a measured approach to openness. It's not just complete openness with everyone you meet or complete cryptic, insular stealth mode.

Post reply on HN