Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jmtulloss 6653 days ago
Why?

If a product is good and investors are convinced it has a market, they'll invest. Otherwise I'll need to move on to something more compelling. That's no reason not to try. Insisting on an identified market before starting on something would eradicate a whole lot of University research.
2 comments
mixmax 6653 days ago
"Why?"

Because a great product is not the same thing as a great company. Investors don't invest in a good product, they invest in great people. Look at any VC or angel webpage and you'll see what I mean. Here is a quote from YC: "The people in your group are what matter most to us"

And btw. University research is for finding out how the world works, business is about making money. There is a big difference between the two.

link
aswanson 6653 days ago
Investors don't invest in a good product, they invest in great people

How are they quantifying great people if they are new? School? GPA? Fraternity? What is this VC metric based upon?

How can you not judge a founder based upon the product of their efforts if it is not good?

link
chaostheory 6653 days ago
wouldn't it be safe to assume that great people make great products?
link
mixmax 6653 days ago
Well, great product people make great products. But if they don't have great marketing people nobody will know.
link
chaostheory 6653 days ago
from what I gather you seem to be saying is that great product people aren't as great as great marketers / biz people and that great product ppl/devs can't simultaneously have great marketing and biz skills too
link
mixmax 6653 days ago
What I'm saying is that we should all try to get along and try to respect each others skills.

That's all :-)

link
aswanson 6652 days ago
Nothing wrong with that.
link
run4yourlives 6653 days ago
>If a product is good and investors are convinced it has a market, they'll invest.

The business world is littered with great products with no markets. And, as dot bomb showed us, investors don't have a clue. My advice would be to arm yourself with market knowledge, and not rely on investors.

>Insisting on an identified market before starting on something would eradicate a whole lot of University research.

That's why a whole lot of University research gets grants from taxpayers - nobody is willing to fork over any dough for most of it.

Seriously, are you trolling?

link