[LRUG] Startup Timeline

[Najaf Ali]

I'm mostly just playing at this entrepreneurship thing (i.e. my goals are
somewhat modest[0] and I don't have the risk tolerance to bet the farm on
any single idea) so take from that what you will, but I've got more failed
products swimming around in my home directory than I'd care to enumerate.

My general rule for any business idea now is that I need money in the bank
(i.e. pre-orders) before I write a line of code/material/whatever. Think of
it as test-driven business: prove the business case first and then create
the content or software to meet the demand. This talk by Patrick McKenzie
from MicroConf 2012 <http://vimeo.com/47311461> (from about 08:00 to 14:30)
details how he learned to do it when doing custdev for Appointment
Reminder<https://www.appointmentreminder.org/>,
which by all accounts is doing quite well.  This strategy has also worked
quite well for the training offerings and consulting packages (not time and
materials development work) I've been busy with lately.

If I was going to focus on building a SaaS product I'd try to pick a market
where I can make an offer that fits within the constraints that Jason Cohen
(of A Smart Bear and WPEngine) outlines in this
talk<http://vimeo.com/74338272> (also
from MicroConf, but 2013 instead).

Cheers,

P.S. This is kind of off-topic for LRUG, so if this sort of thing interests
you then we have a monthly support group that meets near Chancery Lane
every month: bootstrappedbusinessmeetup.com

[0]: Well, modest compared to the default raise lots of funding, swing for
the fences and get acquired by AmaGooBookSoft for Scrooge McDuck money
strategy. I'd be content with a "lifestyle" business i.e. a couple of
million a year in annual revenue plus a house near a beach with a study and
a workshop



On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Paul Robinson <paul at iconoplex.co.uk> wrote:

> On 3 March 2014 12:10, MG Lim <mirageglobe at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I am curious about how things for how ideas move on.... -> panning out to
>> projects -> gathering a team and finally to funding rounds?
>>
>
>
> Mistake number 1 I know I made: thinking that entrepreneurship is about
> taking an idea and progressing it. This isn't just about software
> entrepreneurship but covers everything from inventing a better mousetrap to
> opening a pub.
>
> Entrepreneurship is about identifying a market need and coming up with a
> solution that fixes it better than the alternatives in the minds of the
> customer.
>
> It's a subtle difference, but the change in emphasis is really important.
> It is not enough to have an idea and move it on: it needs you to spot a
> market need and identify the solution, and then how you discuss that with
> stakeholders (including the market) is what actually dictates the movement.
>
> The more obvious the need the more excited people will be about a solution
> (and the easier it will be to raise money, recruit, etc.). The more
> convincing your solution, the quicker you will be able to go (because
> you'll get more more money, more people, etc.).
>
> As a result, detailed planning of almost anything pre-launch is likely
> wishful thinking at best.
>
>
>
>> More of a general discussion; but what have your experiences been; if you
>> have been in that path or part of that path? "I wish I had done that in the
>> beginning" moments..
>>
>
>
> I wish I had been considerably more conservative and bearish with my
> time/cost estimates on many occasions. On two occasions with hindsight I
> allowed stakeholders with insufficient experience to take too much control
> (so I got blamed for their fuck-ups), and on one occasion I did not let
> them have enough (so they lost passion for what they were doing).
>
>
>
>> Marketing hells? Traction problems and in reality, the project took a
>> good 3~5 years before media reported it as an overnight success.
>>
>
>
> Actually the reality is after 3-5 years you're probably on the wrong path
> and in need of a pivot if you're not seeing growth. Most of the household
> names had serious traction in under 18 months.
>
>
>
>> PS: particularly with ruby-based frameworks / meteor styled frameworks;
>> prototypes are quick to be churned out.
>>
>
>
> There is no doubt that the power of modern frameworks reduces the time to
> ship and therefore the cost.
>
> What is harder to swallow for most technologists is that shipping the
> product means virtually nothing on its own.
>
> In the same way a marketing team can only get so far with vapourware and
> the fact they will eventually need to ship product, an engineering team can
> only get so far without some serious marketing talent. Good companies with
> strong traction get that way by getting both almost perfect and in harmony.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chat mailing list
> Chat at lists.lrug.org
> http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lrug.org/pipermail/chat-lrug.org/attachments/20140303/e5f948ef/attachment-0003.html>