3 ms·

Patentable and useful doesn't necessarily mean good business. I'm assuming the "bored developer" wants to start a business around whatever idea he can't think

by NSX2 19y ago

Patentable and useful doesn't necessarily mean good business. I'm assuming the "bored developer" wants to start a business around whatever idea he can't think of. There are ideas, some useful, some even patentable, but to make a business you need not so much patents but the ability to present it in such a way that a prospective customer thinks, "That provides me with more value than the price they're asking for, so I should buy it." Think of it this way: are Starbucks lattes patentable? But they are a good value to half-dead zombies on their way to work/on their way back from a grueling day of work. That makes them I think like 10 billion a year, roughly same revenue as Google. BeOS was awesome and technically advanced and I'm sure had many patents. Who paid for it? Nobody. Company's gone. There's a difference.

mixmax 19y ago
Useful implies that a potential customer in the specific market would want to pay for it. ;-) Regarding your starbucks example: the value of Starbucks is not in the idea but in the execution, and that is not what this thread is about. And while I don't mind giving away ideas I can't help anybody execute. Unless I get paid to do so of course ;-)
- NSX2 19y ago
  Useful implies nothing but useful. People don't "want" to pay for anything. People want to keep their money in their pockets. They reluctantly pay for things whose usefulness, real or perceived, substantially exceeds the asked price. Gmail is "useful" but I sure's heck wouldn't pay for it. As for Starbucks, it illustrates my point perfectly: (1) Starbucks is mostly neuro-marketing. I guarantee you that the buzz people get dopamine-wise from expecting the "reward" of a sugar/caffeine rush is much more important (again, the "idea") than the execution, which counts to about 1% of the customers. I know when I need a quick fix 9X out of 10 I couldn't care less if they got the wrong number of pumps of whatever in there. (2) To illustrate the value of an idea, the Frappucino was the idea of 1 store manager. Cost: peanuts. Contribution to bottom line: about a billion a year directly, who knows how much indirectly as a "gateway drink" for non-caffeine drinking teens ... The point was not about the execution, it was a manager thinking, "Within the realm of what we can execute fairly easy, what is a good idea that takes what we can do and adds more value quickly and easily?" And in the larger context, Starbucks doesn't "execute" anything better than countless immitators these days can; but the idea in my mind is "a special little treat I deserve after a long day." A perfectly executed drink with the same stuff in it just wouldn't make me feel the same if I got it in, say, a sushi place. Again - it's the idea of Starbucks = sexy drinks for sexy people. They're not executing that, I'm imagining it. It's an idea.
  - mixmax 19y ago
    I've got a great idea: Crappucino - A frappucion with extra sugar on top. Where are my millions? Sorry but I don't quite think you know what execution is about.
    - NSX2 19y ago
      > I've got a great idea: Crappucino - A frappucion with > extra sugar on top. Where are my millions? No, I'M sorry but I don't quite think YOU know what a "great idea" is about. Frappacino was a great idea where it took off in California because it's hot there and people liked the combo of cold and caffeine buzz. Nobody (as) yet invented a portable high-power expresso maker/ice blender that can chop ice to smithereens in 7-8 seconds or so. So you need Starbucks. Extra sugar on top is pointless because I can go to the condiment counter and just pour more sugar on top for free. So you're idea by definition is not "good" because (a) it offers no value to the customer that they can't get by themselves without you and (b) you haven't figured out how you make money off of it (part of the definition of a good idea to begin with). So in conclusion, you don't have a good idea - you have fluff you can't figure out how to make money off of. That makes you qualified for raising venture capital or applying to ... um ... this place I've heard of where there are a lot of ideas that never wind up making much money as stand alone businesses. But that' doesn't mean you have a good idea. So you have no milliions. Viola. Equation stands. On top of which, I've never downgraded execution. My experience is that it takes a continual mix of both, plus lots of luck and timing, 2 things you can't control. It's usually "execution" people dismissing the value of good (by which I mean you can make money off of) ideas, almost like some obsessive-compulsive insecurity or something. And now there's this post, and when I ask the simple question: what does a person who gives you a good idea get in return, nothing but crickets. So if execution is the be-all end-all, have fun executing hot air people might use but never pay for. See how far that gets you in this new global economic reality we'll be experiencing for the next 3-5 years. Go on. Go execute ideas you can't figure out how to make money off of. Keep me updated.
      - mixmax 19y ago
        So why didn't Coffee Connection in Boston make millions selling frappucino? They are the ones that hold the trademark.
- simon1ltd 19y ago
  I don't typically spend money unless something hurts, in which case I'll often spend far more than I should. If you can find a product that makes a "pain" go away -- you've probably got something marketable.

by NSX2 19y ago

mixmax 19y ago

Useful implies that a potential customer in the specific market would want to pay for it. ;-) Regarding your starbucks example: the value of Starbucks is not in the idea but in the execution, and that is not what this thread is about. And while I don't mind giving away ideas I can't help anybody execute. Unless I get paid to do so of course ;-)

NSX2 19y ago
Useful implies nothing but useful. People don't "want" to pay for anything. People want to keep their money in their pockets. They reluctantly pay for things whose usefulness, real or perceived, substantially exceeds the asked price. Gmail is "useful" but I sure's heck wouldn't pay for it. As for Starbucks, it illustrates my point perfectly: (1) Starbucks is mostly neuro-marketing. I guarantee you that the buzz people get dopamine-wise from expecting the "reward" of a sugar/caffeine rush is much more important (again, the "idea") than the execution, which counts to about 1% of the customers. I know when I need a quick fix 9X out of 10 I couldn't care less if they got the wrong number of pumps of whatever in there. (2) To illustrate the value of an idea, the Frappucino was the idea of 1 store manager. Cost: peanuts. Contribution to bottom line: about a billion a year directly, who knows how much indirectly as a "gateway drink" for non-caffeine drinking teens ... The point was not about the execution, it was a manager thinking, "Within the realm of what we can execute fairly easy, what is a good idea that takes what we can do and adds more value quickly and easily?" And in the larger context, Starbucks doesn't "execute" anything better than countless immitators these days can; but the idea in my mind is "a special little treat I deserve after a long day." A perfectly executed drink with the same stuff in it just wouldn't make me feel the same if I got it in, say, a sushi place. Again - it's the idea of Starbucks = sexy drinks for sexy people. They're not executing that, I'm imagining it. It's an idea.
- mixmax 19y ago
  I've got a great idea: Crappucino - A frappucion with extra sugar on top. Where are my millions? Sorry but I don't quite think you know what execution is about.
  - NSX2 19y ago
    > I've got a great idea: Crappucino - A frappucion with > extra sugar on top. Where are my millions? No, I'M sorry but I don't quite think YOU know what a "great idea" is about. Frappacino was a great idea where it took off in California because it's hot there and people liked the combo of cold and caffeine buzz. Nobody (as) yet invented a portable high-power expresso maker/ice blender that can chop ice to smithereens in 7-8 seconds or so. So you need Starbucks. Extra sugar on top is pointless because I can go to the condiment counter and just pour more sugar on top for free. So you're idea by definition is not "good" because (a) it offers no value to the customer that they can't get by themselves without you and (b) you haven't figured out how you make money off of it (part of the definition of a good idea to begin with). So in conclusion, you don't have a good idea - you have fluff you can't figure out how to make money off of. That makes you qualified for raising venture capital or applying to ... um ... this place I've heard of where there are a lot of ideas that never wind up making much money as stand alone businesses. But that' doesn't mean you have a good idea. So you have no milliions. Viola. Equation stands. On top of which, I've never downgraded execution. My experience is that it takes a continual mix of both, plus lots of luck and timing, 2 things you can't control. It's usually "execution" people dismissing the value of good (by which I mean you can make money off of) ideas, almost like some obsessive-compulsive insecurity or something. And now there's this post, and when I ask the simple question: what does a person who gives you a good idea get in return, nothing but crickets. So if execution is the be-all end-all, have fun executing hot air people might use but never pay for. See how far that gets you in this new global economic reality we'll be experiencing for the next 3-5 years. Go on. Go execute ideas you can't figure out how to make money off of. Keep me updated.
    - mixmax 19y ago
      So why didn't Coffee Connection in Boston make millions selling frappucino? They are the ones that hold the trademark.
simon1ltd 19y ago
I don't typically spend money unless something hurts, in which case I'll often spend far more than I should. If you can find a product that makes a "pain" go away -- you've probably got something marketable.