I Failed My Startup and Tactical Advice So You Don’t Fail Yours (2 of 4)(mikechirokas.medium.com)
mikechirokas.medium.com
I Failed My Startup and Tactical Advice So You Don’t Fail Yours (2 of 4)
https://mikechirokas.medium.com/how-i-failed-my-startup-tactical-advice-so-you-dont-fail-yours-2-of-4-7bf620d36442
12 comments
Really good advice and cannot agree more with you. Looking forward to your next article.
This is very good advice.
Of particular note - if you're solving a consumer or business problem that isn't of itself 'technology' - then almost assuredly your 'implementation' is next to worthless until it's mature.
The entire problem lies in the overall user experience, and the customer development channels.
Technical ability is a nice asset, but in most situations it's just labour, like the ability to use a hammer and saw effectively - it's kind of a commodity.
#1 is good as well, thanks to the author, these are important lessons.
Of particular note - if you're solving a consumer or business problem that isn't of itself 'technology' - then almost assuredly your 'implementation' is next to worthless until it's mature.
The entire problem lies in the overall user experience, and the customer development channels.
Technical ability is a nice asset, but in most situations it's just labour, like the ability to use a hammer and saw effectively - it's kind of a commodity.
#1 is good as well, thanks to the author, these are important lessons.
> Investors are professional bullshit detectors.
Are they though? It's hard to believe that after Theranos, Nikola, Solar roadways, crypto scams, WeWork, Juicero, etc.
Are they though? It's hard to believe that after Theranos, Nikola, Solar roadways, crypto scams, WeWork, Juicero, etc.
Thanks for reading :)
I do believe that investors are pro bullshit detectors. You mentioned some great misses but even Steph Curry misses open threes every once in a while and he's a professional 3-point shooter.
I do believe that investors are pro bullshit detectors. You mentioned some great misses but even Steph Curry misses open threes every once in a while and he's a professional 3-point shooter.
Aren't investors known to miss far more (10 to 1 or more) than hit, and just rely on those successes to cover the losses?
I'm to the point anymore that when I see 'startup' I think 'relatively useless internet site that sells data to advertisers'.
I agree that some of these folks half-addled. The Theranos gang of Schultz, Mattis, Kissinger should be no more listened to than the drunk at the end of the bar. Late-stage capitalism gives you creatures like David Boies.
To be fair a real scam has serious panache. I'd have to put the Pixelon corporate party at the very top of the list.
I agree that some of these folks half-addled. The Theranos gang of Schultz, Mattis, Kissinger should be no more listened to than the drunk at the end of the bar. Late-stage capitalism gives you creatures like David Boies.
To be fair a real scam has serious panache. I'd have to put the Pixelon corporate party at the very top of the list.
> When I finally did user interviews, I uncovered that an unusually high amount of people have “travel funds”: separate bank accounts they use for travel. I ran a statistically significant survey for the United States. I found that more than 25 million adults in the U.S. use a separate bank account for travel, but almost no one I talked to had automated and optimized their process for transferring money into and out of their travel fund.
That's surprising. I would have suspected that more than 75% pay for their travel on a credit card. They decide to travel first, then pay for whatever piles up later. Or maybe they just let the balance accrue.
How did you conduct a "statistically significant survey" on this for the US? Maybe there's a startup idea there.
That's surprising. I would have suspected that more than 75% pay for their travel on a credit card. They decide to travel first, then pay for whatever piles up later. Or maybe they just let the balance accrue.
How did you conduct a "statistically significant survey" on this for the US? Maybe there's a startup idea there.
Typically this just means the naive approach: 385 or so people assumed to be randomly sampled, which yields results at 95% confidence with a 5% margin of error.
I used Google Surveys which handles the cleaning of responses for representative sampling for U.S. 1,500 people took the survey but only 1,128 were recorded after cleaning.
> I thought I wouldn’t get valuable feedback on lousy prototypes.
That's some really good advice that I should take myself
That's some really good advice that I should take myself