|
|
|
|
|
|
by mattgreenrocks
975 days ago
|
|
|
Strong agree. There are well-intentioned voices that emphasize not building unless you know there is a market for what you are making. And I believe they’re mostly right, as lack of product/market fit is usually fatal to an idea. However, for people like myself that crave certainty and end up sitting on things because nobody’s screaming about their pain in easily seen locations, or connecting it to potential fixes. So I opt to do nothing rather than small experiments seeing what will stick. And I lose out on potential experience and wins. The issue isn’t the advice, it’s how the advice interacts with my disposition towards skepticism and needing proof that something will work out before it’s done. That’s not how any of this works. It’s always a risk. That's the fun part, really. |
|
|
If it's in the B2B space, it's often still about finding which parts are painful enough to pay for is fun.
The long and short of it is people will justify what they want to build what they want without making it customer or market focused.
Building the future is fun, but timing the market is what kills most of those attempts.
Building what's needed now and ready to adopt might grow into something far more, like the first version of Facebook was very simple, not what it grew into (with users in hand learning along the way) to the complex thing it is now.
The metric that matters is people who sign up, use it, and pay. The last one is usually not one that funded startups want to know much about because it actualizes potential and valuations. In that way self-funded startups (or with F2F) has to focus on default-alive economics sooner, which can be great for an idea to hang around until it's time comes.