4 ms·
I think 2 is a common misconception. People who might not have much money to spend on luxury services as described in the article will most likely still pay for
by tijs 10y ago
I think 2 is a common misconception. People who might not have much money to spend on luxury services as described in the article will most likely still pay for something that truly solves a problem. Actually solving a problem will always be worth more than scratching an itch. Taking the 'underserved' seriously as potential customers is worth a strategy meeting at a lot of startups I'd say.
- canadaduane 10y agoAt the bottom, where need is greatest, they may be underserved because they have so little money. I'd love to see the entrepreneurship engine better incented to search for solutions in such a space. I see universal basic income as a worthy pursuit for this reason (among others)--universally distributing an incentive to solve the problems of the bottom 20% would work wonders.
- Retra 10y agoI've probably seen like 40 "boil water with sunlight" inventions over the last decade, each of which is claiming to revolutionize the lifestyle of poor Africans. ...Which is great, I guess, but nobody with money is buying them. And the fact that I've seen so many of these tells me more that people are really trying to sell something to me: the idea that I can feel good about myself by donating money to Joe Rando USA with a pot and some bubble wrap.
- eitland 10y agoWoman in sibling company to where I work sell efficient wood stoves by the container: http://www.primestoves.com/ http://www.primestoves.com/ They are very well received, saves fuel (and thereby CO2) and gives cleaner air indoors. And, yes: people with money are buying them.