The issue is: we don't know which ideas are good or bad.
The stats from Venture Capital markets are showing that clearly.
Before someone even gets a meeting with a good VC firm the idea is already filtered 100-1 if not 1000-1.
Of those who get the meeting, maybe 1 in 100 get an investment.
Of those that get an investment, out of 10 maybe 1 or 2 become the really great successes and the remaining 8 are somewhere between "mild return" and "complete failure".
Since even the best of the best cannot tell what idea is good and which one is bad, we value all ideas as bad ideas i.e. at zero.
I'm quite sure that in that list I've posted there are at least few good ideas i.e. ideas that, when well executed, would lead to a profitable, solo business.
I think this is part of the issue. Unlike the GP, I think the expectation is often both difficult and sometimes expensive. Often ideas seem bad only because they were executed poorly; good execution acts as a type of filter.
I don't agree that "good ideas are expensive".
The issue is: we don't know which ideas are good or bad.
The stats from Venture Capital markets are showing that clearly.
Before someone even gets a meeting with a good VC firm the idea is already filtered 100-1 if not 1000-1.
Of those who get the meeting, maybe 1 in 100 get an investment.
Of those that get an investment, out of 10 maybe 1 or 2 become the really great successes and the remaining 8 are somewhere between "mild return" and "complete failure".
Since even the best of the best cannot tell what idea is good and which one is bad, we value all ideas as bad ideas i.e. at zero.
I'm quite sure that in that list I've posted there are at least few good ideas i.e. ideas that, when well executed, would lead to a profitable, solo business.
I just don't know which ones are good.