[ilamont]

To me, "wantapreneur" is synonymous with the people who are big on talk or the trappings of startup life without actually making anything or are constantly looking for someone else to build out their big idea. At least you're building something on your own!

Of the many pieces of pg startup wisdom cited or linked to on HN, the one bit that sticks with me is just five simple words, from one of his early essays (1):

Make something that people want.

If you can figure that out, you'll be on the right track. You've made some mistakes; learn from them and make something better that customers truly want.

1. http://www.paulgraham.com/good.html

[nojvek]

I’ve always resonated more with a slightly modified version in a much more powerful way.

“make and sell something people want”

It’s not a business unless money is getting transferred!

[bloomer]

I think the most correct version is

“Make something people will buy from you”

There are actually plenty of things people want that you can sell but they won’t buy, for example because they can get it cheaper or free somewhere else.

[nl]

I think PG was very careful and very precise about the advice he gave there. If you look at the context he specifically addresses and discards the idea of trying to make money from it straight away:

About a month after we started Y Combinator we came up with the phrase that became our motto: Make something people want. We've learned a lot since then, but if I were choosing now that's still the one I'd pick.

Another thing we tell founders is not to worry too much about the business model, at least at first. Not because making money is unimportant, but because it's so much easier than building something great.

A couple weeks ago I realized that if you put those two ideas together, you get something surprising. Make something people want. Don't worry too much about making money. What you've got is a description of a charity.

When you get an unexpected result like this, it could either be a bug or a new discovery. Either businesses aren't supposed to be like charities, and we've proven by reductio ad absurdum that one or both of the principles we began with is false. Or we have a new idea.[1]

It's fine to disagree with that advice of course. But I think in the context of YC it make sense. If you aren't doing YC and can't raise capital as easily then maybe not.

[1] http://www.paulgraham.com/good.html

[nojvek]

I believe apart from being in Silicon Valley, raising capital in other parts of the world is significantly much much harder.

In SV, you can go “I’ll worry about funding problem later, if I have good growth and retention, raising money will be a breeze and I’m fairly confident of it as there are tons of VCs in this economy blowing cash”

In other parts of the world: “It could mean the death of my company if I can’t raise money and using up the little I have. Bootstrapping and being profitable is a much more saner route”