I Reached $4k/Mo. But How Many Great Startup Ideas Have Died?(microfounder.com)
microfounder.com
I Reached $4k/Mo. But How Many Great Startup Ideas Have Died?
https://microfounder.com/blog/no
100 comments
What is this? An article spoiled with 4000 in almost every sentence. As if that amount is attracting someone to start something.
Money is never the motivator.
I created several products on my own. All solo. Some make 30k a month. I never thought about becoming rich or making this amount or that amount. I always wanted to create a product people enjoyed. I never used any so called accelerator tools. Analytics usage very basic. I spend all my time in development. Frontend , backend , infra everything.
Please don't believe these annoying articles or products they represent. They sell air.
$4000 a month is enough to live on. Knowing that solo founders have bootstrapped to $4000 a month is highly significant to someone with the right skills but a short financial runway.
You are of course right, but I can also see holoduke's point. I'd just change to "Money is never the right motivator" (not the only sufficient one, anyway).
I think he’s trying to say that you shouldn’t let outside validation or invalidation affect your decision to build a startup.
You as the founder should know (via research, interviews, insights and industry knowledge) whether your startup is solving a real problem. Don’t let someone with less expertise than you talk you out of it, or converse, talk you into it.
I've found that whenever I've shared my ideas with friends or family, they default to poking holes in them. Instead of looking for reasons why it could work they start listing obvious problems that I've already considered. Things like "You would have to get insurance" or my personal favorite "if it were that easy then everyone would be doing it." Because of this, I learned long ago not to share any of my projects or ideas with anyone.
The flip-side is that when I started to have some success, those same people who would always be so negative became angry with me. After his first time visiting my new home one guy even picked a fistfight with me and I've picked up that several family members have been running me down behind my back.
Many working-class people are prone to envy but at the same time they underestimate their own potential. It's best not to worry about them.
The flip-side is that when I started to have some success, those same people who would always be so negative became angry with me. After his first time visiting my new home one guy even picked a fistfight with me and I've picked up that several family members have been running me down behind my back.
Many working-class people are prone to envy but at the same time they underestimate their own potential. It's best not to worry about them.
I feel like I heard someone once tell me if you talk about what you are going to do it reduces the chance you’ll actually do it… so just do it is my approach in general… congrats on reaching 4k
I have a lot of variance in how I answer "what are you building?" for this exact reason. There is what I am building right now and my vision. Getting people to see the vision is difficult.
>What are you building?
1. An image labeling tool for making open datasets.
2. A data-centric training and serving platform.
3. I am going to index the physical world in the same way Google indexes the internet.
>What are you building?
1. An image labeling tool for making open datasets.
2. A data-centric training and serving platform.
3. I am going to index the physical world in the same way Google indexes the internet.
I'm working on a B2C product as an indie founder and I run into this quite a lot. Though from my perspective a lot of the "physical vs non-physical" disconnect is also about the fact that people who have not had direct experience in the creation of a software product are unable to extrapolate from what they're currently seeing.
I think that's actually completely reasonable though; people take things at face value. But what that means is that all the potential in the world means nothing unless you can show via features how that's a good thing and what the impacts are.
This impacts the product I'm working on because there's a lot of stuff on a base level that seems like similar products in the space but the real value is the integration of systems and data to fundamentally change the interactions. And until recently, we didn't have much of the "Big Picture Ideas" on display for our users.
I think that's actually completely reasonable though; people take things at face value. But what that means is that all the potential in the world means nothing unless you can show via features how that's a good thing and what the impacts are.
This impacts the product I'm working on because there's a lot of stuff on a base level that seems like similar products in the space but the real value is the integration of systems and data to fundamentally change the interactions. And until recently, we didn't have much of the "Big Picture Ideas" on display for our users.
This is a typical example of over-generalization. The author believes because he is successful, his approach to success must be correct or optimal.
The truth is that almost all ventures will end reaching his level of success if you simply don’t give up, and apply consciousness to your work. You’ll likely have to pivot as you learn more about your chosen market, but if you’re smart and persistent you’ll eventually figure something out.
Instead of shutting out criticism early on (like the author suggests), it’s better to listen and just throw out the unhelpful parts. I’ve actually found that investors are great at pointing out legitimate weaknesses in your business model, but they typically overstate the lethality of such weaknesses.
The truth is that almost all ventures will end reaching his level of success if you simply don’t give up, and apply consciousness to your work. You’ll likely have to pivot as you learn more about your chosen market, but if you’re smart and persistent you’ll eventually figure something out.
Instead of shutting out criticism early on (like the author suggests), it’s better to listen and just throw out the unhelpful parts. I’ve actually found that investors are great at pointing out legitimate weaknesses in your business model, but they typically overstate the lethality of such weaknesses.
This seems to be the perfect place to reply with a smart remark that subtly links to the project you are building:
https://thestackreport.xyz
https://thestackreport.xyz
So microfounder.com is selling a list of ~200 startups operated by solo founders making $4k/Mo in the process. Huh, you really can sell everything these days. Inspiring!
I don't agree with blog posts being referred to as "physical" and thoughts being referred to as "non-physical".
How many Great Startup Ideas Have Died? Probably as many that where started and failed despite people telling them it would fail to begin with. The success cannot be predicted in advance. A great startup idea by definition is one that first gets started and then becomes successful. Ideas that fail are never considered great.
This is the first level.
On the next level, many good ideas fail because they arrive too early. Apple Newton in 1992, a flop, embodies many of the ideas that made iPhone in 2007 a colossal success. Examples are many.
Sometimes it's worth revisiting a failed but promising idea, and check if the factors that made it fail are still extant.
On the next level, many good ideas fail because they arrive too early. Apple Newton in 1992, a flop, embodies many of the ideas that made iPhone in 2007 a colossal success. Examples are many.
Sometimes it's worth revisiting a failed but promising idea, and check if the factors that made it fail are still extant.
I've heard all the negative slogans from people who don't know any better. I have tons of ideas but only one set of hands. I usually don't plan to implement anything which is the only poor quality of the business plans I bother to talk about.
The funniest has to be one where I spend years simplifying the description of the product because people didn't understand how it was suppose to work. The comments were persistently negative and dismissive but went from hating on one part they didn't understand to the next. The pun here is that if people are to stupid or lazy to understand your product you don't have a product. Eventually (after years) I got the description hammered down to beautiful short and easy to understand.
It was so mind-blowingly simple now that the same moaners each individually took the same entirely different angle of attack (because it are attacks): If it was that simple someone else would have done it.
The actual lesion to be learned from this process is not what you think. I look at the "negativity first" folk as sad little creatures who simply don't get it. It is behavior so pathetic and intentionally hurtful that you should go on a search to find those qualities in yourself.
Every man or woman has things that make them get up in the morning. Their own passions or things to ponder. We all know instinctively how to hide these precious things from others who want to rub poop on them. If you approach someone humbly and carefully and ask them to tell the story of their thing they will re-examine you, look closely what the intend is behind your questions. If you are honest, kind and objective long enough they will eventually tell you how they found their thing and what makes it such an interesting thing for them personally.
Identify and purge the negativity from your system when it arises, something like: "what an idiot spending all this money on model trains" or "the banjo is a dumb instrument", "this woman with her stupid hand bag collection". Listen but focus on the emotions and stories around their passion.
And then... all of a sudden... you find yourself surrounded by passionate people. It is remarkably easy to work on your own thing in the right company. You might not be sinking years into trying to bake the perfect cheese cake but your know your [proverbial] software project is not up to those standards. You go back in to check if you dotted the i's perfectly because that is what you do, who you are.
The funniest has to be one where I spend years simplifying the description of the product because people didn't understand how it was suppose to work. The comments were persistently negative and dismissive but went from hating on one part they didn't understand to the next. The pun here is that if people are to stupid or lazy to understand your product you don't have a product. Eventually (after years) I got the description hammered down to beautiful short and easy to understand.
It was so mind-blowingly simple now that the same moaners each individually took the same entirely different angle of attack (because it are attacks): If it was that simple someone else would have done it.
The actual lesion to be learned from this process is not what you think. I look at the "negativity first" folk as sad little creatures who simply don't get it. It is behavior so pathetic and intentionally hurtful that you should go on a search to find those qualities in yourself.
Every man or woman has things that make them get up in the morning. Their own passions or things to ponder. We all know instinctively how to hide these precious things from others who want to rub poop on them. If you approach someone humbly and carefully and ask them to tell the story of their thing they will re-examine you, look closely what the intend is behind your questions. If you are honest, kind and objective long enough they will eventually tell you how they found their thing and what makes it such an interesting thing for them personally.
Identify and purge the negativity from your system when it arises, something like: "what an idiot spending all this money on model trains" or "the banjo is a dumb instrument", "this woman with her stupid hand bag collection". Listen but focus on the emotions and stories around their passion.
And then... all of a sudden... you find yourself surrounded by passionate people. It is remarkably easy to work on your own thing in the right company. You might not be sinking years into trying to bake the perfect cheese cake but your know your [proverbial] software project is not up to those standards. You go back in to check if you dotted the i's perfectly because that is what you do, who you are.
money is so important
The only person you should ever ask if they like your startup idea are potential customers. Share with them the problem you’re tackling and the solution you’re building.
opinions from anyone who is not your potential customer means literally nothing. Be it positive or negative. Friends, investors, strangers on the internet. Nobody matters except for customers.
When I started a tiny design agency [1], I got the same reaction from random people (not scalable, why are you only focussing on B2B etc). We’re doing very well luckily and it’s a joy working with customers who love what you are offering.
[1] http://fairpixels.pro
opinions from anyone who is not your potential customer means literally nothing. Be it positive or negative. Friends, investors, strangers on the internet. Nobody matters except for customers.
When I started a tiny design agency [1], I got the same reaction from random people (not scalable, why are you only focussing on B2B etc). We’re doing very well luckily and it’s a joy working with customers who love what you are offering.
[1] http://fairpixels.pro
And how do you find these potential customers to ask?
This is basically the one thing that no one ever teaches you but is arguably the hardest part. I think Steve Blank's Customer Development Manifesto nails it on the head: https://growthorientedsustainableentrepreneurship.files.word...
This is the reason you often see older (person's age) entrepreneurs more successful because they've already created network of trust, or people who have exited multiple companies...getting intros to potential clients for customer development is stupidly easy because you're already pre-sold because of those relationships.
That being said, I've found in my career that as long as you're willing to listen to early potential customers most individuals of any size company are motivated to tell you all about their issues. Trust me, get someone on the phone and they'll air all of their dirty laundry. You gain trust with those early potential customers (and eventually payments) by being a good listener - replay back what you heard, explain how you're going to fix it, and then deliver.
As Steve Blank says "There are no facts inside your building, so get outside". I'm going to generalize here, but I think the reason too may technically minded entrepreneurs fail is because they're simply too introverted to get outside.
This is the reason you often see older (person's age) entrepreneurs more successful because they've already created network of trust, or people who have exited multiple companies...getting intros to potential clients for customer development is stupidly easy because you're already pre-sold because of those relationships.
That being said, I've found in my career that as long as you're willing to listen to early potential customers most individuals of any size company are motivated to tell you all about their issues. Trust me, get someone on the phone and they'll air all of their dirty laundry. You gain trust with those early potential customers (and eventually payments) by being a good listener - replay back what you heard, explain how you're going to fix it, and then deliver.
As Steve Blank says "There are no facts inside your building, so get outside". I'm going to generalize here, but I think the reason too may technically minded entrepreneurs fail is because they're simply too introverted to get outside.
What I've often seen with startups on MicroFounder – cold outreach.
"We started with cold outreach to creators, Indie Hackers, and startup founders, who might be interested in our product." – Marie from Tally ($24k/mo)
Depending on the product, some communities can be also helpful, but this probably doesn't work for everything. It did for Julien who is building NotionForms though (now $11k MRR): https://microfounder.com/startups/notionforms
"We started with cold outreach to creators, Indie Hackers, and startup founders, who might be interested in our product." – Marie from Tally ($24k/mo)
Depending on the product, some communities can be also helpful, but this probably doesn't work for everything. It did for Julien who is building NotionForms though (now $11k MRR): https://microfounder.com/startups/notionforms
That's what Steve Jobs did. Got featured in the Ashton Kutcher movie.
When he screams after getting hung up on--that's the 150th call he made that day. They were rude as shit with him. That rejection is too lightly touched on.
And it's like a club for a novat after you ask every girl to dance and nothing, then go ask every girl to dance again. Wander. No validation. Get their contempt.
He didn't add up to shit in the eyes of VCs. Nothing. His resume was just...and he didn't have chapitas, badges of eg graduating from the right schools, and then a smooth up-and-to-the-right career trajectory that had to trace an exponential curve. Dropouts were nothing then, like you could open up a photo booth be a hippie or yes be an inventor--sort of in the late seventies, very limited, not open to everybody by that point like in the 1920's.
VCs only got more open-minded by people like Jobs--him more than absolutely anybody--opening those skulls with the rippling effect of figurative kicks to the ass. Missing out. Getting bounced. And for a few with already open minds, absurd riches.
Work the club.
When he screams after getting hung up on--that's the 150th call he made that day. They were rude as shit with him. That rejection is too lightly touched on.
And it's like a club for a novat after you ask every girl to dance and nothing, then go ask every girl to dance again. Wander. No validation. Get their contempt.
He didn't add up to shit in the eyes of VCs. Nothing. His resume was just...and he didn't have chapitas, badges of eg graduating from the right schools, and then a smooth up-and-to-the-right career trajectory that had to trace an exponential curve. Dropouts were nothing then, like you could open up a photo booth be a hippie or yes be an inventor--sort of in the late seventies, very limited, not open to everybody by that point like in the 1920's.
VCs only got more open-minded by people like Jobs--him more than absolutely anybody--opening those skulls with the rippling effect of figurative kicks to the ass. Missing out. Getting bounced. And for a few with already open minds, absurd riches.
Work the club.
Where ever they are. Customers are school teachers? Go to FB groups where they gather.
Targeting Marketing execs? Send them an email.
Targeting Marketing execs? Send them an email.
I'm doing a meal planning app[0], didn't really think there'd be a facebook group for that, but lo & behold...
Now I guess i have to get a facebook account :/
[0] - www.reciped.io
[0] - www.reciped.io
So I've just tried joining a few of these facebook groups, and a number of them ask specifically if you're going to try marketing to the group, and have rules against it. Seems like they've had enough of this tactic.
You don't join FB groups to market to them! You join to do customer development.
There's a huge difference between going in and going "try my app" and "hey I'm an app developer, building this thing, and I'm wondering if people here would find X or Y more useful".
Do it the first way and you'll get banned. Do it the second way and you'll get people asking to try it.
There's a huge difference between going in and going "try my app" and "hey I'm an app developer, building this thing, and I'm wondering if people here would find X or Y more useful".
Do it the first way and you'll get banned. Do it the second way and you'll get people asking to try it.
If you're planning to immediately market to your target customer segment you're doing it pretty wrong since you almost certainly don't have product market fit yet. You should be talking with them, asking questions, learning, and trying to understand their pain points, existing solutions, & decision making processes. I recommend the book The Mom Test here. Marketing comes after all of that and there are many posts on how to do it with small ad spends, a landing page, and an email signup form.
You can learn a lot by not marketing.
That's a good point. I'm not a very good marketer, so that should be pretty easy haha.
you may be buy some ads targeting these specific group. If your app is really solving some problem, you likely will get good conversion rate.
You do a super neat hero page with the features your product will have. You say you are working on it but they can preorder. When they click on preorder with the price you actually say that no payment is required but you will shoot them an email when the product will be ready to be tested.
That way the person saw your product, saw the price, and was ready to buy it.
That way the person saw your product, saw the price, and was ready to buy it.
I think that at least for B2B it's key to have someone among your founding team who either is/was a potential customer (e.g. has worked for some years in the role&industry who would be buying this) or personally knows a few such customers (e.g. because they have worked in a different role but in the same industry, or in a similar role in a different industry).
If you don't have that, you can "import" that knowledge but that will take a lot of effort and time, and you risk making some very wrong assumptions early on. And IMHO there are no shortcuts, to understand your market you have to walk a mile in their shoes, and if you haven't already done so before starting the startup, doing that will take out a big chunk of your runway. So it's not about some specific activities, but about choosing a project that fits your team or a getting together a team that fits your project.
If you don't have that, you can "import" that knowledge but that will take a lot of effort and time, and you risk making some very wrong assumptions early on. And IMHO there are no shortcuts, to understand your market you have to walk a mile in their shoes, and if you haven't already done so before starting the startup, doing that will take out a big chunk of your runway. So it's not about some specific activities, but about choosing a project that fits your team or a getting together a team that fits your project.
again and again it is this road to customers that is tough as a technical founder, who can I hire on upwork that can take on this task of doing cold out reach? Business development? How would I structure the compensation (per lead or per hour or both?)
so many ideas fail because they cannot get through this grind.
I got my customers from a simple tweet that was retweeted. It's literally rolling dice because when I posted the same thing years ago there was no response.
I wonder if successful people just got lucky at rolling dices early on that puts them in a good mentality position to build their chips for the bubbles in a poker tournament.
so many ideas fail because they cannot get through this grind.
I got my customers from a simple tweet that was retweeted. It's literally rolling dice because when I posted the same thing years ago there was no response.
I wonder if successful people just got lucky at rolling dices early on that puts them in a good mentality position to build their chips for the bubbles in a poker tournament.
Two words: survivor bias.
Survivor here, with several failed startups in the past. Bootstrapped to 100k / mo over 10 years.
Sufficiently cynical folks will never hear anything I say as anything other survivor bias.
My only advice is stay bootstrapped, avoid company-ending risk like investment, and maintain control of the company. Through learning and persistence, you'll figure out how to grow it.
Just remember that the survivors figured out two things: how not to die (much easier for the Bootstrapped), and how to adapt to changing conditions.
Sufficiently cynical folks will never hear anything I say as anything other survivor bias.
My only advice is stay bootstrapped, avoid company-ending risk like investment, and maintain control of the company. Through learning and persistence, you'll figure out how to grow it.
Just remember that the survivors figured out two things: how not to die (much easier for the Bootstrapped), and how to adapt to changing conditions.
"not dying" is surprisingly underrated these days :D
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15659076
Copy pasted:
Entrepreneurship is like one of those carnival games where you throw darts or something.
Middle class kids can afford one throw. Most miss. A few hit the target and get a small prize. A very few hit the center bullseye and get a bigger prize. Rags to riches! The American Dream lives on.
Rich kids can afford many throws. If they want to, they can try over and over and over again until they hit something and feel good about themselves. Some keep going until they hit the center bullseye, then they give speeches or write blog posts about "meritocracy" and the salutary effects of hard work.
Poor kids aren't visiting the carnival. They're the ones working it.
Copy pasted:
Entrepreneurship is like one of those carnival games where you throw darts or something.
Middle class kids can afford one throw. Most miss. A few hit the target and get a small prize. A very few hit the center bullseye and get a bigger prize. Rags to riches! The American Dream lives on.
Rich kids can afford many throws. If they want to, they can try over and over and over again until they hit something and feel good about themselves. Some keep going until they hit the center bullseye, then they give speeches or write blog posts about "meritocracy" and the salutary effects of hard work.
Poor kids aren't visiting the carnival. They're the ones working it.
Don't be silly. Any self-employed plumber is an entrepreneur. Some of them (many of them) didn't have the cash to get a degree or the college experience, but their job is highly entrepreneurial.
> Two words: survivor bias.
Pfft. You're only saying this because you're alive. I want to hear from dead people.
Pfft. You're only saying this because you're alive. I want to hear from dead people.
That's one way to put it. Another way is to say that you had a good enough execution to stand out from the crowd of all the other failed startups and the people criticizing your idea didn't have the same vision as you. The reality is probably somewhere in the middle.
This begs the question: why is the startup now making $4k a month?
Is it because of the idea, or is it because of other factors? Or the idea combined with other factors? Addressable Market? Marketing savvy? Sales leads? Product execution? Luck/Viral Posts/First Mover Status?
I like that this common criticism was brought up in the article:
> "Doesn't this exist? So many big platforms do it. Very competitive."
This is a validator in itself. A small business can see an existing, competitive market, and that's usually an indicator that there are a lot of potential customers. If you look at products like FastMail or Hey they aren't so concerned that 95%+ of people are fine with the big free email providers, because literally everyone uses email at some point.
I think my overall point is this: The "idea" part of a startup is perhaps one of the less important aspects of it, in my opinion. Maybe it's even the least important part of the equation.
Is it because of the idea, or is it because of other factors? Or the idea combined with other factors? Addressable Market? Marketing savvy? Sales leads? Product execution? Luck/Viral Posts/First Mover Status?
I like that this common criticism was brought up in the article:
> "Doesn't this exist? So many big platforms do it. Very competitive."
This is a validator in itself. A small business can see an existing, competitive market, and that's usually an indicator that there are a lot of potential customers. If you look at products like FastMail or Hey they aren't so concerned that 95%+ of people are fine with the big free email providers, because literally everyone uses email at some point.
I think my overall point is this: The "idea" part of a startup is perhaps one of the less important aspects of it, in my opinion. Maybe it's even the least important part of the equation.
> Is it because of the idea, or is it because of other factors?
Not because of the idea specifically! But I've seen in my own life and in the lives of other "microfounders" that if you're not sure about your startup idea or you don't have that much momentum going on with it (it's a new idea, you haven't thought about it much) it's much easier to abandon the idea when you hear from friends, investors, or just some random people on Twitter that this idea is not a good one and it probably won't succeed.
Not because of the idea specifically! But I've seen in my own life and in the lives of other "microfounders" that if you're not sure about your startup idea or you don't have that much momentum going on with it (it's a new idea, you haven't thought about it much) it's much easier to abandon the idea when you hear from friends, investors, or just some random people on Twitter that this idea is not a good one and it probably won't succeed.
I have experienced this many, many, many times, so I'm really grateful for what you wrote.
Even if I don't think I'm absorbing other people's doubts about whether it would work, or even internalizing their certainty that it won't work, I can be doing that exact thing outside of my awareness.
It reminds me of the quote attributed to Muhammad Ali: "I said I'm the greatest. I said that even before I knew I was."
How often do I start to doubt my dreams because I'm talking with someone who doesn't share the same dreams? I've wanted to build an online platform to train people to be world leaders, almost like a martial art created by MLK. I can vividly remember when I said this to one guy, a stranger (!), who laughed and said, "I don't think you'll be the person to do that." That has stuck with me for years, a creeping doubt deep within.
That's all to say: thank you very much for what you wrote. I think I needed to read it today.
Even if I don't think I'm absorbing other people's doubts about whether it would work, or even internalizing their certainty that it won't work, I can be doing that exact thing outside of my awareness.
It reminds me of the quote attributed to Muhammad Ali: "I said I'm the greatest. I said that even before I knew I was."
How often do I start to doubt my dreams because I'm talking with someone who doesn't share the same dreams? I've wanted to build an online platform to train people to be world leaders, almost like a martial art created by MLK. I can vividly remember when I said this to one guy, a stranger (!), who laughed and said, "I don't think you'll be the person to do that." That has stuck with me for years, a creeping doubt deep within.
That's all to say: thank you very much for what you wrote. I think I needed to read it today.
Another thing to be cautious about is folks who steer your idea in a new direction towards a larger TAM (with bigger encumbents) because they don't see how the current idea can 1000X.
Sometimes, intentionally going after a market niche can be a good thing; you don't always have to set your sights on being the next unicorn. Especially if you're starting out as a solo dev, building the best product out there for a very specific audience can be a good strategy that leaves you with enough breathing room to continue to innovate and grow incrementally.
That's the general approach I've been taking with ProjectionLab.com (the personal finance simulator I've been building on the side for a year now) and thus far, it's been a fun and modestly fruitful journey.
Sometimes, intentionally going after a market niche can be a good thing; you don't always have to set your sights on being the next unicorn. Especially if you're starting out as a solo dev, building the best product out there for a very specific audience can be a good strategy that leaves you with enough breathing room to continue to innovate and grow incrementally.
That's the general approach I've been taking with ProjectionLab.com (the personal finance simulator I've been building on the side for a year now) and thus far, it's been a fun and modestly fruitful journey.
> Sometimes, intentionally going after a market niche can be a good thing
Solo founder of a successful self-funded business here. A market niche is in my opinion the best place to be. A niche will be enough for a small business, but might be too small for the crazed GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH mindset of most companies. That's good! It means that you won't be competing with companies burning through VC money and selling at below cost (as in $19/month B2B SaaS) just to get GROWTH.
As to the main point of the article — pretty much all advice I was given turned out to be wrong. And nearly everything you read on HN (especially comments) is wrong. Or, more precisely, it's advice given by people who are not in your situation, have never experienced your situation, and likely never will. This applies to business strategy, but also to technology: your choices will be influenced by very different factors than those of people commenting here. You won't care about "industry-standard practices", fashions, trends, or "will it help my career" factors. You will care about line count, total cost of ownership, pace of changes (things that change quickly are expensive to use), reliability, and the ability to fix things when something breaks.
So, my advice would be to make your own choices and take all advice with a very critical mindset. Including this advice, obviously :-)
Solo founder of a successful self-funded business here. A market niche is in my opinion the best place to be. A niche will be enough for a small business, but might be too small for the crazed GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH mindset of most companies. That's good! It means that you won't be competing with companies burning through VC money and selling at below cost (as in $19/month B2B SaaS) just to get GROWTH.
As to the main point of the article — pretty much all advice I was given turned out to be wrong. And nearly everything you read on HN (especially comments) is wrong. Or, more precisely, it's advice given by people who are not in your situation, have never experienced your situation, and likely never will. This applies to business strategy, but also to technology: your choices will be influenced by very different factors than those of people commenting here. You won't care about "industry-standard practices", fashions, trends, or "will it help my career" factors. You will care about line count, total cost of ownership, pace of changes (things that change quickly are expensive to use), reliability, and the ability to fix things when something breaks.
So, my advice would be to make your own choices and take all advice with a very critical mindset. Including this advice, obviously :-)
100%. Or actually maybe I should say 75%... I think you're spot on that industry veterans, seasoned entrepreneurs, and assorted commenters (myself included of course), often give advice that's not quite calibrated to one's specific scenario and constraints; and sometimes those calibration errors can lead to conclusions that are 180 degrees off the actual best path. But at the same time, I would also say that over the years I've read a lot of great commentary on HN that I'd like to think has improved my overall mental model of the world, technology, and business.
P.S. I also agree that when you hear stories of venture-backed startups trying similar product ideas but then needing to pivot due to insufficient growth, that should often be music to the ears of a solo bootstrapper ;)
P.S. I also agree that when you hear stories of venture-backed startups trying similar product ideas but then needing to pivot due to insufficient growth, that should often be music to the ears of a solo bootstrapper ;)
When I talk to friends about what I'm working on, I call it a "small business", and not a "startup", even though its purely software and could scale without substantially growing costs. I think the word "startup" gives the wrong impression—I don't care about scaling aggressively, I don't want to grow the team, I don't want to raise outside capital, I'm happy to stay within the niche. I think this framing tends to generate less pushback (and focus the conversation more on how I can serve the niche better).
I suppose the more precise word for this is a "lifestyle business", but not as many people are familiar with that term, and it can have a bit of a different connotation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifestyle_business
I suppose the more precise word for this is a "lifestyle business", but not as many people are familiar with that term, and it can have a bit of a different connotation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifestyle_business
On the other hand, I was hired at a startup a few years ago that had never raised money, had been profitable for a decade, and was just minting money hand over fist. It was a tech company, though, so it qualified as a "startup". (It was EasyBib.com)
Just because you're a tech company does not mean you're a startup. Especially if you've been running for 10+ years...
yeah isn't it interesting how the unnecessary and easily harmful thing of raising capital is seen as validation?
it just gets you press, but if there isn't really a larger TAM then you can personally wind up making less money than just keeping full ownership of the company.
thinly held companies can be conduits for really decent sums of money completely privately.
it just gets you press, but if there isn't really a larger TAM then you can personally wind up making less money than just keeping full ownership of the company.
thinly held companies can be conduits for really decent sums of money completely privately.
I like the term lifestyle business... but I'd be hesitant to use it until the business actually supported my lifestyle.
To acquaintances, I'll often just say "I'm building an app". Small business is a decent alternative, but a lot of the time when I use that term I'll feel pressure to clarify that it's not like.. a lawn mowing business or something. (nothing against those though!)
To acquaintances, I'll often just say "I'm building an app". Small business is a decent alternative, but a lot of the time when I use that term I'll feel pressure to clarify that it's not like.. a lawn mowing business or something. (nothing against those though!)
I used the term lifestyle business for a while, when dating and on dating apps.
Women were mostly enamored because they thought it was like a Youtuber thing, or lifestyle in the fashion sense, or a Youtuber telling people about lifestyle fashion of some sort.
Very different from "any line of business, implied as passively w/ recurring revenue, that happens to supports your lifestyle"
(I pivoted away from that, I found other truthful things that hit pretty well.)
Women were mostly enamored because they thought it was like a Youtuber thing, or lifestyle in the fashion sense, or a Youtuber telling people about lifestyle fashion of some sort.
Very different from "any line of business, implied as passively w/ recurring revenue, that happens to supports your lifestyle"
(I pivoted away from that, I found other truthful things that hit pretty well.)
I'm the founding CTO of a small startup, and I've been trying to find the business equivalent of your side project. Have you come across any modern tools for financial forecasting?
This seems exactly what you are looking for
https://www.causal.app/
After looking through their landing page, I totally agree, this looks perfect. Thank you!
I've been shown a couple tools geared for startups that some of my users had been playing around with, but those didn't look modern or nuanced enough to me. I haven't done a formal search though, so perhaps there are good things out there I'm not aware of. Eventually, I'd like to add better support for business use cases to ProjectionLab; in some ways, it's already close, but I'll need to carefully think through a few things like more granular event timing/scheduling and short/near-term views.
Visual editor seems pretty cool. Can summit do probabilistic things like monte carlo simulation as well, or is it scoped to deterministic projection?
Creator here.
You can use fuzzy numbers to get varied output, and if you want to do MC you can use the API into your model to call it with whatever distributions you want and aggregate the output. But no, our UI doesn’t natively support doing a MC sim because the demand is frankly less than you’d expect. :)
You can use fuzzy numbers to get varied output, and if you want to do MC you can use the API into your model to call it with whatever distributions you want and aggregate the output. But no, our UI doesn’t natively support doing a MC sim because the demand is frankly less than you’d expect. :)
Causal, Pry, Finmark etc are good tools. Costs can vary, you'll need to be clear about your specific goals to stay price effective.
I’ve used a lot of financial forecasting software from Oracle/SAP to SaaS to all the startups. I do implementations and day to day CFO empowerment.
The new kid on the block I like is cubesoftware.com . It’s priced rather affordably for a small business but maybe not a solo sized one
The new kid on the block I like is cubesoftware.com . It’s priced rather affordably for a small business but maybe not a solo sized one
What kind of forecasting are you looking for?
I'm searching for something similar to calculate profits & planning expenses over time.
If I can't find something that works, this might be something I'm considering to build myself.
If I can't find something that works, this might be something I'm considering to build myself.
Did you build the thing from the tweet? A marketplace for microstartup investment?
Ah, I suspected that the main image may give a wrong feeling as it's not really about a microstartup investments right now. But it fit together with the "no" and "your idea is not good" topic so I kept it.
Anyways, I'm still planning to build a part of MicroFounder towards investments. Probably not legal/technical side but the marketplace, yes.
The idea is this: you're a developer and you want to build a (micro)startup that pays your bills etc. But it can be hard to find the necessary time and energy to work on it so much that it will succeed (or it takes just too long). And of course there's a risk that it will never take off.
So, you de-risk and sell part of it to an investor. Maybe even not a % of the company but you agree on a profit share for some period/amount.
Because now you have an idea for a startup and – let's say — $120k to pay your salary until you reach $10k MRR, or something like that. You will focus on this startup and see if it works out or not after a year.
Another thing is from the point of the investors. Like this whole MicroAcquire thing. I was considering selling my other solo startup RemoteHunt.com – some investors said that "hey take like $120k for 10% but I still need you on the project as otherwise I have to hire a team etc that takes a lot of money, time, etc.)
Anyways, I'm still planning to build a part of MicroFounder towards investments. Probably not legal/technical side but the marketplace, yes.
The idea is this: you're a developer and you want to build a (micro)startup that pays your bills etc. But it can be hard to find the necessary time and energy to work on it so much that it will succeed (or it takes just too long). And of course there's a risk that it will never take off.
So, you de-risk and sell part of it to an investor. Maybe even not a % of the company but you agree on a profit share for some period/amount.
Because now you have an idea for a startup and – let's say — $120k to pay your salary until you reach $10k MRR, or something like that. You will focus on this startup and see if it works out or not after a year.
Another thing is from the point of the investors. Like this whole MicroAcquire thing. I was considering selling my other solo startup RemoteHunt.com – some investors said that "hey take like $120k for 10% but I still need you on the project as otherwise I have to hire a team etc that takes a lot of money, time, etc.)
I completely understood the context of the tweet in the post, but was interested if there was traction in the investment marketplace.
I've browsed microacquire both as a founder and as an investor. As an investor, I always come back to the same thought that I'd just be buying another job, which isn't so appealing.
I've browsed microacquire both as a founder and as an investor. As an investor, I always come back to the same thought that I'd just be buying another job, which isn't so appealing.
Recently I've been contemplating about creating something fairly small, that would eventually bring in. ~100K/year. Many would say it's not big enough,or so,but it would allow me to build a decent retirement fund, support many activities that don't cost a fortune but still require money and so on.
Yes! This is what my site MicroFounder is exactly about and by that, I don't mean you should buy the paid membership (you can build it without paying for any "framework" or community or whatever).
I feature new startups built by solo founders on the front page (for free) to show people that it's possible to build a profitable internet startup to pay the bills. Or, to keep the job and build a retirement fund, or travel fund, or whatever.
I'd say that every developer should think about it. Yes, of course, work your full time dev job but also start thinking and then building some small startups. Maybe you won't reach $10k MRR in a year (although I have many examples on my site who do) but still, you're starting to move in this direction.
And there's this question of "if" – can I succeed? Others are doing it, but me — me personally, can I do it? And I'd say of course, yes, 100% – because it's a matter of making the decision.
I feature new startups built by solo founders on the front page (for free) to show people that it's possible to build a profitable internet startup to pay the bills. Or, to keep the job and build a retirement fund, or travel fund, or whatever.
I'd say that every developer should think about it. Yes, of course, work your full time dev job but also start thinking and then building some small startups. Maybe you won't reach $10k MRR in a year (although I have many examples on my site who do) but still, you're starting to move in this direction.
And there's this question of "if" – can I succeed? Others are doing it, but me — me personally, can I do it? And I'd say of course, yes, 100% – because it's a matter of making the decision.
I don’t understand why it’s just a one time payment?
If you’re doing a micro-startup, you need valuable tools and insight today. You don’t care about 12 months from now. You certainly don’t care about $99 twelve months from now…
If it was $99/yr would it decrease your conversion rate even a little bit?
For fun, add a toggle to let people set it to not auto-renew and Tell HN a month from now how it went?
Don’t actually implement any recurring billing code until 11 months from now, just save sign-up date and what renewal preference they selected in a database somewhere?
Possibly never bother even writing the code to kick out people who don’t pay for their renewal?
Actually, maybe frame it as a way for micro-startups that succeed with your help, they will basically have a way to keep donating $99 a year to a tool that really helped them, even if they outgrow it?
Hmmm… pricing is hard. But lifetime service memberships inevitably become an albatross don’t they?
I can tell you this - a $99 customer has lifetime value of $99, but a $99/yr customer has lifetime value of $99 * 1.0 / C. Where C is churn and worst case churn is 1.00 but realistically will be less than 1.00 (100%).
In any case, it would be hugely interesting to play with that pricing model!
If you’re doing a micro-startup, you need valuable tools and insight today. You don’t care about 12 months from now. You certainly don’t care about $99 twelve months from now…
If it was $99/yr would it decrease your conversion rate even a little bit?
For fun, add a toggle to let people set it to not auto-renew and Tell HN a month from now how it went?
Don’t actually implement any recurring billing code until 11 months from now, just save sign-up date and what renewal preference they selected in a database somewhere?
Possibly never bother even writing the code to kick out people who don’t pay for their renewal?
Actually, maybe frame it as a way for micro-startups that succeed with your help, they will basically have a way to keep donating $99 a year to a tool that really helped them, even if they outgrow it?
Hmmm… pricing is hard. But lifetime service memberships inevitably become an albatross don’t they?
I can tell you this - a $99 customer has lifetime value of $99, but a $99/yr customer has lifetime value of $99 * 1.0 / C. Where C is churn and worst case churn is 1.00 but realistically will be less than 1.00 (100%).
In any case, it would be hugely interesting to play with that pricing model!
>> If you’re doing a micro-startup, you need valuable tools and insight today. You don’t care about 12 months from now. You certainly don’t care about $99 twelve months from now…
Exactly, the value is in the present, not in the future. This is so clearly obvious that anybody purchasing it knows that there's no value exchanged for the recurring fee and thus the recurring fee looks like a shady cash grab and is more likely to result in less overall sales.
Exactly, the value is in the present, not in the future. This is so clearly obvious that anybody purchasing it knows that there's no value exchanged for the recurring fee and thus the recurring fee looks like a shady cash grab and is more likely to result in less overall sales.
There's nothing wrong with a lifestyle business like this. It's just not something you should think about with the "startup" business and financial framework. Those are particular tools that address a particular set of problems.
There's a major set of difference between a startup and a small business.
There's a major set of difference between a startup and a small business.
Curious to hear more about your idea if you feel like sharing. Is your 100k ARR target an estimate based on research into the space or more like a notional goal you'd be content with reaching?
Do it. That would also be an asset worth anywhere from $100k-500k (depending on the type of business, growth rate, etc).
How could you possibly know some product or idea would bring in such a specific amount?
>> I don't see how this could grow 100x.
This only means it's not large enough to be investible, that's not necessarily a problem and doesn't mean it's an inherently "bad" idea.
Small ideas can net the individuals that work on them just as much as working on large ideas... the workforce might be smaller but once you divide it up it's all the same. If the idea provides value to the world, you like it, and can grow it without investment, go for it.
This only means it's not large enough to be investible, that's not necessarily a problem and doesn't mean it's an inherently "bad" idea.
Small ideas can net the individuals that work on them just as much as working on large ideas... the workforce might be smaller but once you divide it up it's all the same. If the idea provides value to the world, you like it, and can grow it without investment, go for it.
100%.
Some of the most important problems in the world are solved by a thousand "tiny" companies. Sure, they didn't look attractive from an investor's standpoint (most live by the 'high risk = high reward' approach), but that does not mean they are not important.
Some of the most important problems in the world are solved by a thousand "tiny" companies. Sure, they didn't look attractive from an investor's standpoint (most live by the 'high risk = high reward' approach), but that does not mean they are not important.
[deleted]
In my experience "friends" are clueless, especially if they have ni clue about IT and the possibilities.
They only see "virtual product" and can't imagine you being successful because after all they aren't and you can't be better than them.
I got rid of those friends. In fact if you have them on board sooner or layer you'll have trouble with them.
Them not working hard enough or not taking it seriously enough or not only not supporting your vision but actively fighting it.
It's bad for the friendship and bad for the business.
After all friends are just people you spent time with more than with other people, because circumstances or similar view on things. That was then but life goes on and people change.
After all friends are just people you spent time with more than with other people, because circumstances or similar view on things. That was then but life goes on and people change.
This is a terrible take on friendship.
Is this a hot take on the risks of going into business with friends? Or a hot take on... friends in general?
I just passed 100 downloads of my app after 6 months and I’m thrilled with that pace. In that time I’ve been able to make sure my backend is solid, and talk with people to gain valuable insights. My main metric is excitement. If I’m excited to show people my app and they are excited to try it after we talk, I’m happy.
Peter Drucker, perhaps the greatest business guru of the 20th Century, once remarked that innovators are often disappointed by the manner in which their innovations become popular. In his 1985 book, Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Drucker relates the story of Alfred Einhorn, who invented Novocain, which then became popular with dentists as a local anesthetic. Einhorn held a contempt for dentistry, since it represented such a small niche of medicine. He felt that Novocain should be used by surgeons for all forms of surgery, and so he waged a campaign against the use of Novocain by dentists. In the end, his innovation was successful despite him, rather than because of him. According to Drucker, this pattern, where a product or service is undercut by the entrepreneur who is trying to promote it, is extremely common.
When I first read Drucker’s book I found it hard to believe that an entrepreneur would actively sabotage their own innovation. However, having now spent several years working with startups, I’ve seen that it is, indeed, a common pattern. Many entrepreneurs starts websites at least in part because they consider themselves uniquely creative and insightful, and they want the whole world to see them as they see themselves. The website they launch proves them wrong: their insights are proven false, what works in the end is something unexpected. For instance, in 1992, when Bo Peabody launched Tripod, he was thinking that the site would offer content aimed at college students. His idea failed. The company was saved because some of the programmers at the company had started a side project that allowed anyone to create their own web pages. This then became the future of the company. In his book, Lucy or Smart, Peabody says it is important to be smart enough to know when you are getting lucky. And then, you have to be willing to accept that luck. This takes humility. What’s needed in an entrepreneur is emotional resilience, the kind of strength that allows for openness to the unexpected.
Twice now I’ve seen an entrepreneur sabotage their own website because it became successful for what they felt were the wrong reasons. This emotional resistance to success is nearly always inspired by one of two factors:
1.) The success is with a small niche. The startup was suppose to grow till it was larger than Google, and success with a small niche is, therefore, extremely disappointing. The niche might be big enough to potentially generate several million in revenue, but it won’t ever be enough to catch up with Google.
2.) The success is of a conventional type and, therefore, the entrepreneur regards it as boring. Perhaps the site was suppose to pioneer an altogether new style of interaction among humans, and instead the part of the site that becomes popular is of an old type – for instance, the blog on the site becomes highly successful. The entrepreneur is then disappointed, maybe even angry, to be the owner of a boring success.
Drucker also emphasized how much self-sabotage tends to trip up entrepreneurs. I documented a case of this in my own book, How To Destroy A Tech Startup In Three Easy Steps:
https://www.amazon.com/Destroy-Tech-Startup-Three-Steps-eboo...
When I first read Drucker’s book I found it hard to believe that an entrepreneur would actively sabotage their own innovation. However, having now spent several years working with startups, I’ve seen that it is, indeed, a common pattern. Many entrepreneurs starts websites at least in part because they consider themselves uniquely creative and insightful, and they want the whole world to see them as they see themselves. The website they launch proves them wrong: their insights are proven false, what works in the end is something unexpected. For instance, in 1992, when Bo Peabody launched Tripod, he was thinking that the site would offer content aimed at college students. His idea failed. The company was saved because some of the programmers at the company had started a side project that allowed anyone to create their own web pages. This then became the future of the company. In his book, Lucy or Smart, Peabody says it is important to be smart enough to know when you are getting lucky. And then, you have to be willing to accept that luck. This takes humility. What’s needed in an entrepreneur is emotional resilience, the kind of strength that allows for openness to the unexpected.
Twice now I’ve seen an entrepreneur sabotage their own website because it became successful for what they felt were the wrong reasons. This emotional resistance to success is nearly always inspired by one of two factors:
1.) The success is with a small niche. The startup was suppose to grow till it was larger than Google, and success with a small niche is, therefore, extremely disappointing. The niche might be big enough to potentially generate several million in revenue, but it won’t ever be enough to catch up with Google.
2.) The success is of a conventional type and, therefore, the entrepreneur regards it as boring. Perhaps the site was suppose to pioneer an altogether new style of interaction among humans, and instead the part of the site that becomes popular is of an old type – for instance, the blog on the site becomes highly successful. The entrepreneur is then disappointed, maybe even angry, to be the owner of a boring success.
Drucker also emphasized how much self-sabotage tends to trip up entrepreneurs. I documented a case of this in my own book, How To Destroy A Tech Startup In Three Easy Steps:
https://www.amazon.com/Destroy-Tech-Startup-Three-Steps-eboo...
I have a moderately successful website and know the feeling you describe.
One other consideration has been to find other creative outlets in order to not feel compelled to constantly redesign and overhaul it into oblivion.
One other consideration has been to find other creative outlets in order to not feel compelled to constantly redesign and overhaul it into oblivion.
Ideas are cheap. Implementation is the hard part!
I have enough experience to implement anything from microcontrollers and Linux drivers to react webapps and scalable k8s clusters. I think that I can build most projects alone and limited only by time, not by skills. I have yet to find an idea that I would consider worthy spending time on, despite the fact that I really want to be independent developer with my own project. Of course I had miriads of ideas but nothing that I would really trust to become a business, even something small. I think that it's required to have some different background to be able to understand what people need and to be able to reach those people, because anything you could imagine as a programmer was implemented or nobody will pay for it.
In my experience, you can create literally anything and there will be someone out there who will pay for it. Ideas don't matter in that respect.
The hard part is implementing methods and processes that will capture the early adopters and learn from them so that you product can grow into something that is appealing to a wider audience.
Tech implementation is easy. Business implementation is hard.
The hard part is implementing methods and processes that will capture the early adopters and learn from them so that you product can grow into something that is appealing to a wider audience.
Tech implementation is easy. Business implementation is hard.
> Tech implementation is easy. Business implementation is hard.
This is what we tell the MBAs so they feel better. Keep up the good work!
This is what we tell the MBAs so they feel better. Keep up the good work!
Thing is, MBAs end up in roles under existing business that are already implemented because they don't know how to implement business. An experienced developer is likely in a better position to implement business, but it is still going to be hard.
I know several people with very limited tech skills that were able to at least make something that got them some income from a tech product. It sounds like you are over filtering ideas. Throw a few apps or pages out and see if any get traction after some outreach. Either ads or cold emails, etc. Like the famous quote saying noone would use dropbox because you could do it yourself. You probably come up with good ideas but are like "Why would anyone pay for this?"
My comment isn’t a hard rule or anything. Sounds like you have the opposite problem! You’re probably in the minority here.
Also it’s not just the technical implementation that I’m talking about. Creating a business is hard.
Also it’s not just the technical implementation that I’m talking about. Creating a business is hard.
[deleted]
I'm interested to hear more about your criteria for "worthy (to spend) time on". My email is in my profile.
[deleted]