[privacypoller]

This reads like a variation on the "many successful products started off looking like toys" post I've seen repeatedly over the years. The problem with this theme is extrapolating that all toy markets/products will grow into sustaining ecosystems.

You can and should consider toy "beachheads" into larger and growing markets, but the idea of targeting a small/limited market is flawed IMO.

The examples presented are successful in what where HUGE markets with limiting factors. No one debated the size of the retail book business when Amazon started, the challenge was how to pay for things over the internet. Ebay provided market-making for individuals to sell stuff - anyone remember classified ads and the buy & sell? That was big business for newspapers.

I feel like there's a lot of selection bias and revisionist history in this post.

[fsloth]

"the idea of targeting a small/limited market is flawed IMO."

Why? If the market is not 'interesting', the less likely it is to enter the killzone of the large incumbents. Getting a large share of small market is still real business. A relatively small market does not mean the market could not sustain a business or two...