[rafd]

Starting with "problems" is already cutting out half of the kinds of businesses that exist.

I much prefer the "jobs-to-be-done" framing: people and organizations desire certain things done, and they pay for products/services to get them done; some jobs are not being well done (and thus, a "problem"), but many jobs are being done fine, but, there may still be opportunities to do them much better. (aka "pains" and "gains")

Ex. Alice was fine with her extra bedroom but AirBnB allowed her to make an extra 2k per month? etc

Its often easier to find acute pains to address than great gain opportunities, but it is possible, and many startups do it. Ignoring gain-potential as an avenue of value creation is myopic.

[ky0ung]

Exactly. I think one could argue that "gains" have yielded more successful startups. e.g. Amazon/DoorDash - driving to the store was "fine", but ship to home = way more convenient Uber - Waving down taxi is "fine" experience, but on demand transportation = way more convenient Slack - communicating through email is "fine", but async messaging = more real time and productive

[rafd]

It's typically easier to make money from concentrations of money (rich individuals and companies), and those tend have more gain opportunities than problems (because they've already monied-away their problems).