Live data from Hacker News

My solopreneur story

news.tonydinh.com

641–650 of 669 posts

Re: My solopreneur story

#641

I’m very happy for Tony, it’s a great achievement indeed. Having said that, as an aspiring solopreneur myself, this article misses a very big part. Engineers like to talk about how they build products, but we rarely talk about how to market them. I quit my job 5 months ago, launched my first SaaS 3 months ago, and got zero users. I then started to tweet, write in LinkedIn, and focus on my newsletter. But I barely get…

You can also post about things that are genuinely interesting to you, and achievements that you are proud of. See my post history on HN. I would never have thought that people care about that stuff so I was pleasantly surprised by the warm reception.

I do something similar on social media. I share little updates mixed with factoids about my job. Even if it brought zero new visitors, it feels good to share what I’m working on.

Re: My solopreneur story

#642

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are thousands of HN users now who have read your comment and not one of them knows what you're saas is, how to find it, or even what it's called, but we know you think marketing is hard...

One of the moves in the game that I refuse to play, is shoving your product down the throat of everyone. I’ve seen it live on LinkedIn when one of my followers started to post generic comments, under my posts, such as: “totally agree with you! Subscribe to my newsletter”. I find it disgusting. This might be a surprise for you, but sometimes I just want to engage in authentic discussion. I promote my stuff via Show HN…

There is a happy middle ground where you are allowed to bring a little context without annoying everyone.

Re: My solopreneur story

#643
post #551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s stopping them? You can learn to program with free information from the Internet. How much more ideal does it need to be?

Do you think all the people cleaning toilets for little money prefer their job over sitting in a comfortable office and getting well paid? If not, then there have to be barriers. Here are some. You need time, you may need additional education before you can even start to tackle programming. You might have to move. You might just not be smart enough. You might not be an autodidact and need a teacher which might cost m…

Not being stuck behind a desk IS a major career motivator for many people. They often go into fields like forestry, hospitality, and, yes, janitorial.

Don't knock the power of a job where you can 100% turn your brain off at work, and 100% turn work off at home, either.

Re: My solopreneur story

#644
post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody said that juvenile games cannot be hard work. And yes, I do believe that most smart people can "rake it in" if they decide to play this game. You mention deny reality. Reality is formed by our actions. Adherence to such systems and the playing of juvenile games ensures their perpetuation. I shall not contribute to what I think is the wrong way to go. And yes, marketing is slyness and trickery. 95% of marketing…

At this point you are either just trolling or being a hypocrite There isn’t a single organization that doesn’t do marketing one way or another (just putting a sign outside a restaurant is marketing, maybe you also consider that to be tricking people and playing games?) Pretty sure that without marketing you would either not have a job or not get paid So you are actually fine with marketing making you money, just as l…

I obviously do not include things like putting a sign outside a restaurant or sponsoring an FSAE team in the same category as being shallow and silly in linkedin or shipping predatory ads to phones.

You obviously cannot see the distinction, so why bother replying ?

  Pretty sure that without marketing you would either not have a job or not get paid  
Oh and, the work I'm doing (aerospace engineering) does not require predatory marketing. It requires results. No need to hype some new tech on twitter and show how I follow the trends.

Re: My solopreneur story

#645

I’m very happy for Tony, it’s a great achievement indeed. Having said that, as an aspiring solopreneur myself, this article misses a very big part. Engineers like to talk about how they build products, but we rarely talk about how to market them. I quit my job 5 months ago, launched my first SaaS 3 months ago, and got zero users. I then started to tweet, write in LinkedIn, and focus on my newsletter. But I barely get…

building is great but most developers don't understand the value of marketing till they ask people to pay for their projects like SaaS etc... I've made some good money in writing in the last 3 years but without marketing it was highly impossible that's why I always encourage to people to start writing be it a tweet, LinkedIn or newsletter etc... and it's again a huge task along with building your products that's why it looks easy from outside but needs more work inside. but before going I've learned from Daniel a lot of things about marketing. Maybe this is useful. Take a look.

A 12 step marketing crash course for non-marketers:

1. If you're trying to sell something, everything you do is marketing.

2. The technical term for trying to sell something is a go-to-market (GTM) strategy.

3. Building a product is part of your GTM strategy.

4. Your combination of skills, knowledge, experience, reputation, assets, connections, etc, create opportunities for you in the market.

5. Once you find an opportunity you'd like to pursue, you should set a payoff expectation. Example: you plan to bring a particular project to market with the expectation of making $100K within 12mo.

6. You should have a viable hypothesis of how that expectation can be realized. Example: to make $100K selling a $100 product, you need 1,000 customers. To get 1,000 customers at 1% conversion you need 100K visits on your landing page. To get 100K visits you need to spend X on ads. And so on.

7. If you can't convince yourself you have a viable and profitable hypothesis, you need to adjust your payoff expectation, or pick another opportunity. You don't have an obligation to pursue every opportunity you encounter.

8. If your payoff expectation is too small for the time and money you're investing to bring your project to market, you should abandon it.

9. If the worst case scenario of your GTM strategy has a chance to put you out of business (by running out of time, money, motivation, etc), you should abandon it. Take risks, but never put yourself at risk.

10. Once you have a project on the market, you have the option (but not the obligation) to improve that project by repeating steps 5-9 on the same project. Every new feature is a new thing you're brining to market.

11. A business with no attention is a business that doesn't exist. You can have the best product in the world, but if nobody knows about it, it's like multiplying by zero — a recipe for failure.

12. Remember: there is no distinction between building and marketing. You build whatever you need to build to realize your payoff expectation. Everything is marketing.

Re: My solopreneur story

#646
This is such a nice story and congratulations Tony. I've seen your journey from the start and always get inspiration. Good luck for the future.

One quick question- Any 2 tips you would like to give to others on "How you did marketing about your projects" I know you tweeted, sent newsletters etc.... but anything else like SEO or hiring any marketers?

Re: My solopreneur story

#647
post #598

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only there was some way to connect 10x SWEs with 10x MBAs :/ An 'accelerator' of some description, perhaps.

Is this something that we can facilitate through IH or elsewhere? I am on the other side - not good enough of a dev but plenty of experience on the biz side.

Let me know if you're interested in brainstorming. I've got extensive dev experience across the stack and can slog my way through marketing/sales but it wears on me quickly and I'm not great at it. I've got some time off coming up and will be looking to pick up a side project or two.

Re: My solopreneur story

#648

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is the efficient market hypothesis. If it really were 100% efficient why would anybody start a company? In reality there are pockets of inefficiency, and they are still working markets. You can see how this interpretation clashes with another dogma of economics: that the price of sth is the price that someone is willing to pay for it. I read your message as saying that this software should be cheaper (arguing work…

The efficient market hypothesis is something different, that one just says that prices reflect all available information. I was talking about competition which should ensure that there are no profits, i.e. that consumers do not pay more than the costs of production, including risk adjustment and development costs and so on, but that are mostly uneccesary details for this discussion. You can see how this interpretatio…

Seems like the disconnect stems from the definition of market failure. In your interpretation, persistence of profits is what makes a market failure. Economic theory is a bit more nuanced than that: market failure means inefficient allocations of goods and services on free markets. Inefficient means that there exists another conceivable outcome where an individual may be made better off without making someone else worse off.

If we accept the notion that whether a market efficient vs inefficient depends on whether there is another conceivable outcome that is not zero sum, we can summarize your argument to this:

there are no profits in efficient, free markets, therefore the existence of profits can be deemed market failures.

so, what other reasons can there be to the existence of profits while achieving maximum efficiency on a market? inelastic demand comes to mind for one which in itself has nothing to do with market failures. there are others, like high barriers to entry or innovation advantages or economies of scale. none of them are indicators of market failure HOWEVER they do suggest further analysis into the market conditions and more importantly the behavior of the players as some companies might be more exposed to act in a way that leads to market failure if these parameters persist. however we would need to assess whether markets with persistent high profit margins are more prone to failure than markets with persistent low or mid margins.

which captures my argument: the persistence of 90%+ profit margins in itself are not a good indicator of market failure. while this is true, we can see that market failure can be present in software markets but that has to do with the market structure due to the behavior of the players not the size of the profit margins.

this is why I think your argument while sounds sensational and a great catchphrase for a political rally, it lacks substance and cannot adequately capture reality.

Re: My solopreneur story

#649
post #639

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have to make 100 widgets to satisfy demand, you can make 75 per hour, I can make 25 per hour. I would say we both worked for an hour, so we both get half of the revenue. You want three quarters of the revenue because you made three quarters of the the widgets? I of course understand that we would want something like that in practice as an incentive, otherwise I could be very lazy and make you do all the work. But…

Because people don’t pay for the cost of goods, they pay for the value they provide. If you need heart surgery that takes four hours, would you pay someone the same amount to take a four hour nap instead? Probably not, but why not? According to your logic the person performing heart surgery and the person taking a nap are both using up four hours of their life, so they should get paid the same amount, right?

Consumers will pay up to the value the product provides to them [1] and producers will sell down to the costs of producing the product. So why do we have economy? We have it in order to provide consumers with goods and services they need or desire as efficiently as possible, not to make producers rich. Profits are a mechanism to steer behavior in an economy, they are not the goal. So in general the price should always get pushed towards the costs of production, that is the role of competition. In case of scarcity the value attribute by different consumers will pull the price up in order to decide the allocation of the available products. [2] This should also encourage the creation of additional supply because the costs of production are below the price so there are profits to be made and the additional supply should then drive the price down further towards costs of production.

Long story short, the price should equal the costs of production, that is the goal. Any deviation from that just exists as a signaling mechanism to steer the system and decide the distribution.

[1] Actually up to the smaller of the value the product provides to them and the money they have available, see also [2].

[2] Note that the available products do not go to the consumers valuing the products the most, they go the consumers capable to pay the highest price. With enough money I could buy up all the heart surgeries because I like collecting them and deprive everyone else of heart surgeries even though they actually need them and value them much higher than me but just do not have the necessary money to outcompete me.

Re: My solopreneur story

#650
post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To a certain extent, yes, let’s defend and embrace greed No, let's not do this. That's literally the root of inequity that is rotting western culture. Put down the Ayn Rand and starting thinking about more than your /r/wsb fantasies of become a wolf of wallstreet or an elon musk. Cultures, cities, and nations' people are dying because of this callous attitude.

If people had no desire for money, there would be no incentive to start companies. Would that lead to a more peaceful world? Maybe, temporarily. But a lack of companies leads to lack of jobs which leads to lots of other bad things.

> If people had no desire for money, there would be no incentive to start companies.

This is just ludicrous, and needs to be corrected. The people I know starting companies (and succeeding) are hardly driven by money.

Post reply on HN