|
|
|
|
|
by jpcx01
5632 days ago
|
|
Nah. pg's post fits perfectly here. Specifically the part "Don't be discouraged if what you produce initially is something other people dismiss as a toy." This is exactly what paras is doing. Dismissing apps he doesn't think can make money as toys. Why should the focus just be on making money? Saying "if your goal is to make money" is sort of strange to me anyways. Probably because my goal is not to make money, but to build new and interesting things that have an impact. Focusing just on money to start seems like the path to building yet another 37signals basecamp knockoff. |
|
No, it's just that bills want to be paid and if you plan on paying the bills from your venture then you should plan on doing something where making money is not a question but (assuming proper execution) as good as guaranteed. Typically in the business world that means you start signing up your (potential, pilot) customers before you have a product.
Dismissing apps that can't make money as toys is not the same as saying that 'what you produce initially is something other people dismiss as a toy'. Really, they're not even close to being the same thing.
> Maybe thats just because my goal is not to make money. It's to build interesting things and have an impact.
Yes, that probably has something to do with it. If making money is a secondary goal to you for whatever reason then you are in a luxury situation, one that likely the vast majority of the people out there envy you very much for.
The interesting part for me is that typically developing without a monetary incentive to do so leads to lots of wasted time and effort, having a simple and concrete number to measure the success of your application by (turnover vs 'eyeballs') works wonders to stay focused.
"Make something people want" is not a religious item, it's common sense if you want to make money you had better make sure that there is a market for your product. That's the 'want' bit.
Developing 'just for eyeballs' or 'impact' or 'personal interest', 'technical fascination' and so on is great but without a monetization strategy you might as well be living in 1999.
You keep taking PGs words out of context and applying them to the writing of Paras because in your mind there is a seeming contradiction but I think the similarities are far larger than the differences.
YC typically does not invest in companies that have no clear idea of how they plan to make money, even when they're focused on the consumers.