Keyword, buzzword, half-truth, adjective, hey look at me! (founder of two unicorns: http://WPEngine.com, http://SmartBear.com). Writing for 18 years at: https://longform.asmartbear.com
7,218 followers 1,689 following 5,493 posts
view profile on Bluesky
Could you do it all again? Stephen King (as Richard Bachman) and J.K. Rowling (as Robert Galbraith) tried. Both were markedly less successful under the pseudonym. But still got published. So: There is skill ("got published") and luck ("not very successful").
A mystery wrapped in an enigma!
Pet peeve of mine is when people confuse "priorities" with "order-of-execution". The latter includes things like capacity, availability, dependencies, and more.
Pet peeve of mine is when people confuse "priorities" with "order-of-execution". The latter includes things like capacity, availability, dependencies, and more.
That is certainly true, for those who are Newton and Einstein. The point is there's more than mode of innovation, accessible to 100000x more people.
What’s the difference between a goal of $1M ARR and a goal of 1666 customers, if I stipulate that every customer’s MRR is $50? If you can’t answer that, you’re not thinking clearly about your company’s purpose, what is a cause, and what is an effect.
You’re building a 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘺 not a 𝘎𝘪𝘵𝘏𝘶𝘣 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘫𝘦𝘤𝘵. If 90% of your time is in Visual Studio, don’t claim you’re building a company. (Or 𝘥𝘰 say that, but then 𝘥𝘰 it -- find potential customers, interview, sell, find one marketing channel that works, …)
Koan #71 I’m better than 99% of humans at XYZ. I can never stop talking about XYZ. I’ll walk through walls of fire as long as I get to do XYZ. What’s my product strategy? It’s ABC. And the student was enlightened.
Concision bleeds out fluff and confusion. So, dictate your thoughts. Condense to one page. Condense to one paragraph. Then to one sentence. You’ll lose operationally-important detail, but you’ll gain clarity on the most important thing.
If you don't like it, then unintended.
At root, you are right. Still, this is something people do say and think, and sometimes it's even true, because there's often loopholes.
Right. Unless it's overwhelming and transformative, it's not a strong point.
When you look at people’s behavior, instead of what they say, you’ll see that people don’t value their time. So, “saves time” doesn’t work as well as you wish it did. Instead, explain how it will create more of whatever they actually want.
🙏
I agree with that also.
Sadly, you are correct. I wish Jensen were. We’ve already had massive productivity gains in the past 150 years, and we already haven’t used them to work less.
The combination of your experiences and your style will naturally produce something valuable. You don't need to “try” to be unique--you already are. “Be yourself; everyone else is taken” --Oscar Wilde (7/7)
People connect with authenticity, not novelty. If you've received feedback like "I needed to hear this today" or "this is great," you're already making an impact. Some people will prefer others' content, some will prefer yours--and that's exactly how it should be. (6/7)
Don't worry about whether someone else has already covered a topic. When you catch yourself thinking "there are already five videos about that," remember that your style and perspective are what matter. (5/7)
Your unique experiences, perspective, and style create value even when discussing concepts others have touched on. It's not about being first--it's about your particular way of articulating and contextualizing ideas. (4/7)
2. 𝗔𝘀𝘀𝗲𝗺𝗯𝗹𝘆: Ensuring the pieces work together as a cohesive system 3. 𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: Presenting the material in an accessible, compelling way (3/7)
Even the popular book TRACTION (defining EOS) begins with the author stating "there's not a single new idea in here." What makes it valuable is: 1. 𝗗𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁: Selecting which methods to include from many options (2/7)
You don't need to invent new ideas to make a significant impact. Consider your favorite teacher or mentor--did they invent the subject they taught? Of course not. Yet they changed your life. (1/7)
Can you be the best in the world? Yes, if you define "best" narrowly, considering "for whom, for what, under what conditions, under what constraints." Start with that, and actually be the best. Feels good. Now widen, but not too much to where you’re no longer special.
“Work smarter, not harder.” It’s true that inefficient work, or working on the wrong thing, both lead to failure. But working “a little on the side” isn’t how any great thing gets accomplished, in startups, art, athletics, science, even hobbies. It’s both, of course.
Price shapes perception. Customers see screenshots and feature lists, but they see the price before they try the product. Low price, middle price, high price, all carries meaning and expectation.
You’re mediocre or even downright terrible at almost every role. But you’re astounding at a few things, under a few conditions. Genuinely incredible. Since you have to do 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 at your own company, you can’t afford not to be amazing where you’re able.
“The harder I work, the luckier I get.” “The luckier you are, the more you can do anything and succeed.” Both things can be true. And, are. The first is what you control, so that’s the one to live and breathe. (Even though the second is also true.)
So often we’re solving problems that don’t exist. What if they abuse the free tier? What if they use it for a day and then cancel? What if they don’t? What if enough people don’t?
Koan #41 “Do this.” “No. You can’t make me.” “Everyone else does this.” “I’m not like everyone else.” “I bet you can’t do this.” “You think so little of me?” “I’ll be proud of you when you do this.” And the student was enlightened.
Fair enough! Just a bad example I suppose.
You learn more about yourself from adversity than from success. You learn more about startups, operations, coding, design, sales, support, finance, marketing, from success, not from disaster-areas.
That's a fair counter-point. One might instead take the totality of how Gates chose to spend the second half of his life, compared with the first. Though your point could be repeated -- I don't know him personally.
Wow I had no idea that went in that direction.
Startups aren't predictable, and they don't need to be. They laugh at larger companies who talk about 1- and 3-year plans. But the startups are wrong; scale requires predictability. Why:
Your product's features is a dance between prioritizing simplicity and creating new, innovative ideas. It's about continuously experimenting with the details while maintaining a steadfast focus on your overarching vision. Really hard.
A few companies took a whole year between launching v1 and getting their first customer, but now they’re successful. Just because you can find 2 examples where it worked, doesn't mean it's a great path. It's not. Don’t use that as an excuse for people not buying.
Some things get easier. Some things get harder. New things appear; some of those are easy, some are hard. Remember to (try to) enjoy the journey; that’s where you spend 99.9% of your time.
Thank you! I have a few ideas for some, but have been working on a book…
Ha, that's true too.
It's easier to be kinder as you grow older. Past events become distant, memory fades, slights don’t feel as important any more. Even Gates and Jobs came to a respectful detant, especially as Jobs faced his mortality. You could choose to calm down, right now.
Nice!
Thank you!
Yes! Except the safety. 😂
Very true.
Product/Market Fit feels like a final puzzle piece snapping into pace; everything changes. If you’re wondering whether you have it, you don’t. It’s too obvious. More, with data:
If you wait until you’re certain about all the details, you’ll never act. If you think you know everything, you’re wrong, and will take wrong actions. The answer is in the opaque, uncertain middle. Knowing this, and striving, 𝘪𝘴 the answer.
Whatever you do in front of people, is what you want them to think you are. Whatever you do when no one is around, is what you are. Neither is inherently bad, or good. Neither must be static, or must change. It’s all up to you.
Nice one!
I wouldn't even say "better." Different. Really: Aligned with the unique set of things that is yourself, because then it will be the best version of 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵, and we all hope enough other people want that too.
** “Optimal” in the sense that if you repeated this bet 𝘢𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘮, this would maximize your expected result. It also completely avoids the Risk of Ruin, unlike many other betting schemes. (9/9)
This does not mean it’s a bad idea to create a startup! It means “Kelly” and other theories of probability don’t apply. It’s simply the wrong domain. Startups are in the domain of uncertainty. There are strategies for dealing with uncertainty. See the article. (8/9)
What is known is downside, which is that you lose all your money and also time. (7/9)
And also because Kelly assumes the probability of success is known, and the magnitude of success is known. Neither are known. If they were, VCs could reliably construct winning portfolios, instead of the median actually losing money, especially risk-adjusted. (6/9)
So indies create a bunch of simultaneous things and all of them do poorly, where in fact some of them might be viable if they would just give them the attention they deserve. (5/9)
But startups aren’t like that. Things you spend a fraction of your time on, are less likely to work. Whether because you didn’t spend the time to figure it out, or didn’t care enough, or didn’t have an insight. (4/9)
Rather, it’s because Kelly assumes the probability of success is fixed, and not itself dependent on the bet size. That is, probably of success is (say) 10%, whether you bet 1% or 100% of your bankroll. (3/9)
I don’t believe it works for bets on startups. Not because the outcome distribution is heavily skewed (i.e. failure is the most likely outcome, but the success upside can be large); Kelly can be adjusted for such things. (2/9)
Like many, I’m enamored with the simplicity and effectiveness of Kelly bets -- the optimal** percent of your bankroll you should place on a bet, given the probability of a win and the % of your bet you win or lose in the case the bet is won or lost. (1/9)
It doesn't have to be, though you wonder what is the point if it isn't. But remember "product" isn't just "the features." It's the design, the positioning, the ideal customer, the ideal use-case, what's easy and hard, the culture of the company, etc..
That's great! Sounds like you do have that. Maybe just a few more customers for stability?
I think so!
It's wonderful that you have the list of 153. Almost no one has that clarity.
Those who have never felt market-pull, think it’s unimportant, or say things like “it’s a continuum.” Those who have, can never un-see it, and know those characterizations are “cope.” You don’t 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥 it to have a real company! It’s not a gate. But it is real.
Great entrepreneurs: • Are introspective • Have insight in the market • Make a great product with minimal negative externality • Execute a clear strategy (not necessarily complex nor novel) • Create enduring products Irrelevant: • Net worth • Company size • Funding
Is there really only 153 companies in the entire market? If so, you'll need a strategy that embraces that, including pricing, size of the company, etc..
It's good that "retention" isn't a problem, so I guess you're right that it's marketing and sales. What is the bottleneck there? E.g. not enough people even look? People who look don't close? People have the pain a little but not enough to buy?
You are not 100% correct. You 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 you are, because “I’m my own customer.” But you’re wrong. You’ll find out when you intersect with actual customers. (You're not 100% wrong either, it's impossible to know which P% is wrong until you ship.)
Your biggest problem is that you don’t know what your biggest problem is. Which means you’re not working on solving it right now.
Haha nice.
Yep, that's what I mean by the second alternative. Your formulation of it is much better and in line with microeconomics. 😄
Yikes, yes! If you feel that way, you shouldn't work with them. Even if it's just your perception, who cares? That's the reality you're going to live in.
🙏 You are very kind! The algo likes other things I suppose. I just do my thing, expecting that people who like my thing will be happy that I don't chase the algo. 😄
Wow I love your home page. Very clear what it is (for your target audience), and personal. So you have a clear mission at least. What is the struggle with prioritization? Deciding between goals like growth or profit, or what's the puzzle?
37signals documented with data how design changes directly resulted in more paying customers. And other products win only because of great design (not features). But not all companies worry about design. How important is it, really?
Fear is good when it’s motivating you to work hard and diligently. Fear is bad when you’re paralyzed, or making you think you’re not good enough as a human being. It can be difficult to steady yourself on that line. Still, that’s where you want to be.
Deals where one party is harmed, is really worse for both. The best relationships are healthy for both. Discounting is one form of harm.
If you need to provide meaningless KPIs to investors, then of course you should! The OP was about what is actually useful to operators, in my opinion.
It's extremely hard to read the label while you're inside the jar. What is the URL for the business?
Early on, before PMF, the startup is changing faster than the world is, and the point of testing and interviewing is to understand how you fit into it. After PMF, you buckle down and focus, still testing for optimization, and because the market will shift over your lifetime.
Sometimes teamwork means winning together. But sometimes teamwork means carrying each other. ❤️ www.linkedin.com/posts/activi...
I like to measure business areas independently instead of trying to lump it all together. Sort of how retention by cohort and segment is actionable, but all together isn't. So e.g. direct marketing can be payback period.
Good for the founder, bad for everyone else who also needs to work with them.
If you can’t articulate both the “why” and “what” of your current plan, why it advances the strategy, how it attacks or side-steps the current obstacles (and what those even are), then it’s an unclear plan, and possibly just wrong. Here’s how to do that:
Haha nice.
Yup, as in all complex systems, everything affects everything else. So the goal has to be harmony in all the things.
🙏
I don't care about ARR/employee. For one thing, it doesn't account for roles or location. If you care about efficiency or profitability, there are better ways to measure those. (Just because a metric definitionally always exists, doesn’t make it useful.)
“Our customers get great value from our software.” Nothing here conveys anything you didn’t already assume. Which customers specifically? How do they measure value? “Mid-sized hotel operators on average see 20% increase in bookings.” Something like that.
The problem with defining yourself by how you’re different competitors, is you’re ceding how to define the market. And you’re just “not them.” Instead, define yourself on your own terms. Talk about competitors only in “comparison” sales materials.
People often conflate: • Market perception (what customers say you are) • Brand assets (logo, font, colors, style, voice) • Values (what is prioritized even over money) Many companies are dissonant between all three. What is “brand?” What is “culture?”
Sad when it's artifically difficult to run a business. It's hard enough already!
Trust comes from repeatedly being your word. This requires consistency and predictability. Which is the domain of mature organizations, not new ones. Yet another reason why “scaling” is different from “figuring it out.”
How to explain to family why a small software biz isn’t as dangerous as they think: The diff b/t a $8000/mo job and a high margin SaaS with 160 customers paying $50/mo is: When one person decides "this isn't for me anymore," you are out $50/mo instead of $8000/mo.
If someone isn't already in the mindset to receive advice, they will not receive it.
Each sale is more motivation. Another customer depending on you. If you're not motivated while still in the first few months of building, then maybe you're just not motivated to make something right now. So don't! Wait until you are.
How do you make a system less brittle? Better controls? Redundancy? Process? Higher quality components? Apply this question and answer to all areas of your business.
too true!
Yes, sales == validation always. (Well, if they don't cancel in 90 days…)
You’re right, this might not be the best path. But “thinking” and “waiting” won’t move you to the best path. Walking down this path, with open eyes, is how you find the best. (Anyway, “best” is an undefinable illusion!)