[tobr]

So if luck is the most important ingredient, would it make sense to go for ideas where you can see a lot of very different opportunities? Because that seems to be slightly opposed to the “correct” approach of starting with understanding a problem, then look for a solution. If you do, your solution is going to be extremely tailored to one specific problem, and if that doesn’t work out, it will be hard to do anything else with it. This is what the lock and key metaphor describes: the key only fits one specific lock, and is useless for anything else.

On the other hand, if you start with the solution before the problem, you can make more of a lock picking set... your solution may fit a whole lot of different problems. To continue to stretch the metaphor, you can now manipulate luck simply be opening more doors.

[hef19898]

My five cents, for what it's worth. You are basically playing the odds. And some strategies are increasing the odds while others are not.

So yeah, taking a domain / business that can easily and quickly iterate in big market is increasing the odds. Better even if you can theoretically cover multiple markets with only minor changes. Even then there are no guarantees, so.

The risk with the last approach, at least a risk I face basically daily, is to loose focus. In my case logistics. Everybody moving physical goods from A to B is a potential customer. So I have to maintain focus, because the little differences make all the difference. Also, I bootstrap. So my runway is limited. For now I have a solution for solar modules in Europe for small order sizes and work on one for furniture and other heavy-bulky goods for e-commerce companies. And I hope one of them flies before I have to go looking for a job elsewhere.