[amichail]

I think it's important to be flexible though. If an idea does not seem to be getting much traction, you might consider moving on to your next idea.

[mukund]

Not really dude, we believe that wasnt the criteria for rejection. We believe in our idea and we will implement that and will go live. Then we will do a soul search depending on how the world reacts

[budu3]

Yep, we got rejected too but we'll take it live. If it doesn't attract users we'll quit and move onto another project.

[amichail]

Well, yes, you would probably want to see how the world reacts before giving up.

[vlad]

If you honestly think PG rejected people based on their idea, I think you're wrong. That's probably the last criteria he used. So, work on the idea. I would reject 90% of submissions, too, if I was running something like this.

For example, with Google, Google AdSense was the glue that made everything work (profitability, great product, many users, good reputation, ability to have free food.) You might say their demo and pagerank was actually important, but they couldn't even sell that for $1 million dollars. Heck, even right now, nobody would buy their original technology as Yahoo! and MSN must have already surpassed the original PageRank in quality.

[mukund]

yep vlad. As i told you, we know why we were rejected. so its not the idea

[amichail]

I think what's important is to do some preliminary user testing to see if people can even understand what the application is all about.

Of course, if you are trying to keep your idea secret, then this could be difficult to do.

[mukund]

Well its ok. We would dare to go ahead and see how users take our model

[IMorgothI12]

The problem isn't when you have an idea and get rejected it's when you have a really good idea and still get rejected.

That's when it hurts.