At the HarvardXDesign conference — a great event for the B-School— I was on a panel that did a crit on two teams from across Harvard that were the best of 9 teams competing in the challenge of How...
Josh Leichtung's insight:
Couldn't agree more with Bruce Nussbaum. Failure early, fail fast, fail often? Nonsense.
Startups are tests. As such, I have always held that it is cheaper and faster in the long run to do it right the first time, than to grope. Succeed early. Succeed fast, Just succeed.
Alternatively, TEST EARLY, TEST fast, TEST often.
For VC's FEFFFO helps limit their downside. The problem is that often VC's place bets on techies that by and large don't have experience actually running a business. Therefore, the cheapest way to test is to take baby steps and let the techie grope in the dark for success.
I met an engineer out of Berkeley with several years of experience under his belt, who recently got his MBA from University of Chicago. Smart guy no doubt. JUST the kind of guy VC's love to back.
He built his "app" and failed fast for several huge (and obvious to me) reasons. He was now trying to find a problem to solve, with the product he built. Crazy right?
Here are some simple rules for startups.
Rule 1. Know thy mark Otet/customer.
Rule 2. See rule #1
Rule 3. Differentiate everything... product, brand, even business model if you can. Differentiation should be defensible if possible.
Rule 4. Nothing in excess.
Rule 5. Constantly test your assumptions... profitability, business model, customer demand, differentiating factors. etc...
Rule 6. Don't put all your eggs in one marketing basket, but no more than 2-3.
Rule 7. See rule #1.
Notice I didn't mention technology at all? Hmmm. Are VC's backing the right combination of people?