4 ms·

> But oh wait he launched DistroKid on the back of the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of registered musicians already using his other site - Fandalism - founded years be

> But oh wait he launched DistroKid on the back of the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of registered musicians already using his other site - Fandalism - founded years before I think it's valid to say that's how his product gained traction quickly, but I doubt that's why DistroKid is a successful company (guess, I'm not in the know). Did I miss where that's against the rules of legitimacy? Or am I misunderstanding what you're implying?

aresant 10y ago
I am not implying his built in audience was the reason for the success. DistroKid is successful because pud is a badass entrepreneur and a passionate musician that understood the pain point and executed beautifully. But at the same time you can't underestimate - or edit the story to not include - the value of early traction and a built in "free" source of eyeballs while you're tweaking product market fit over four years. The price of Pud hitting #1 on HN w/a piece of start-up content marketing is a little sort out - for the rest of us in the comments section here - about what lessons to take away from the content, and what else to consider.
- pryelluw 10y ago
  He is also a good marketer. Thats the key.
pryelluw 10y ago
Its sometimes interpreted as cheating if you leverage any other thing you may have developed. Like an audience or previous product.
- x0x0 10y ago
  Not cheating -- no-one is making a moral claim here -- but to leave running Fandalism out of your description of your success feels like you're eliding crucial information. Like possessing a great marketing channel. And good for Pud for building it and using it! I read these sort of success threads as basically case studies, and that marketing channel is probably relevant.
- visakanv 10y ago
  ^ This is always amusing to me, because people who get really successful do it by compounding earlier wins over decades. I'm reminded of @pmarca's advice for startup founders who want to meet VCs: > The best way to develop contacts with VCs, in my opinion, is to work at a venture-backed startup, kick butt, get promoted, and network the whole way. > If you can't get hired by a venture-backed startup right now, work at a well-regarded large tech company that employs a lot of people like Google or Apple, gain experience, and then go to work at a venture-backed startup, kick butt, get promoted, and network the whole way. > And if you can't get hired by a well-regarded large tech company, go get a bachelor's or master's degree at a major research university from which well-regarded large tech companies regularly recruit, then work at a well-regarded large tech company that employs a lot of people like Google or Apple, gain experience, and then go to work at a venture-backed startup, kick butt, get promoted, and network the whole way. > I sound like I'm joking, but I'm completely serious -- this is the path taken by many venture-backed entrepreneurs I know. – http://pmarchive.com/guide_to_startups_part3.html http://pmarchive.com/guide_to_startups_part3.html
  - taneq 10y ago
    > ^ This is always amusing to me, because people who get really successful do it by compounding earlier wins over decades. The weird thing is how someone who does this is lauded for it, but if it's a family rather than an individual that compounds earlier wins, suddenly it's 'wealth inequality' and terribly unfair.
    - mvp 10y ago
      Maybe because most virtues make sense from an individual perspective rather than a group.
    - TeMPOraL 10y ago
      Because it demotivates people. The thing about capitalism, which I feel is not widely understood, it's that as a participant, you're meant to compete, but you're not meant to win. The need for money to sustain your lifestyle is what drives people to productive work; competition is what drives companies to optimize. But the moment someone wins - a person becomes rich, a company becomes a monopoly - they actually become a problem. At best, they're no longer working and optimizing. At worst, they can disrupt lives of a lot of people. The promise of great wealth is phony by design.
- floodyberry- 10y ago
  When you're self reporting how you think you accomplished something and you leave information out, it's not cheating, it's leaving information out. It doesn't mean it's intentional, but not being intentional doesn't make the left out information irrelevant.
6stringmerc 10y ago
I found DistroKid through here, not Fandalism. Actually, of all the sites I follow, I can't say I actually recall visiting that one on the regular (ex: versus Billboard Biz or Complete Music Update).

aresant 10y ago

I am not implying his built in audience was the reason for the success. DistroKid is successful because pud is a badass entrepreneur and a passionate musician that understood the pain point and executed beautifully. But at the same time you can't underestimate - or edit the story to not include - the value of early traction and a built in "free" source of eyeballs while you're tweaking product market fit over four years. The price of Pud hitting #1 on HN w/a piece of start-up content marketing is a little sort out - for the rest of us in the comments section here - about what lessons to take away from the content, and what else to consider.

pryelluw 10y ago
He is also a good marketer. Thats the key.

pryelluw 10y ago

Its sometimes interpreted as cheating if you leverage any other thing you may have developed. Like an audience or previous product.

x0x0 10y ago
Not cheating -- no-one is making a moral claim here -- but to leave running Fandalism out of your description of your success feels like you're eliding crucial information. Like possessing a great marketing channel. And good for Pud for building it and using it! I read these sort of success threads as basically case studies, and that marketing channel is probably relevant.
visakanv 10y ago
^ This is always amusing to me, because people who get really successful do it by compounding earlier wins over decades. I'm reminded of @pmarca's advice for startup founders who want to meet VCs: > The best way to develop contacts with VCs, in my opinion, is to work at a venture-backed startup, kick butt, get promoted, and network the whole way. > If you can't get hired by a venture-backed startup right now, work at a well-regarded large tech company that employs a lot of people like Google or Apple, gain experience, and then go to work at a venture-backed startup, kick butt, get promoted, and network the whole way. > And if you can't get hired by a well-regarded large tech company, go get a bachelor's or master's degree at a major research university from which well-regarded large tech companies regularly recruit, then work at a well-regarded large tech company that employs a lot of people like Google or Apple, gain experience, and then go to work at a venture-backed startup, kick butt, get promoted, and network the whole way. > I sound like I'm joking, but I'm completely serious -- this is the path taken by many venture-backed entrepreneurs I know. – http://pmarchive.com/guide_to_startups_part3.html http://pmarchive.com/guide_to_startups_part3.html
- taneq 10y ago
  > ^ This is always amusing to me, because people who get really successful do it by compounding earlier wins over decades. The weird thing is how someone who does this is lauded for it, but if it's a family rather than an individual that compounds earlier wins, suddenly it's 'wealth inequality' and terribly unfair.
  - mvp 10y ago
    Maybe because most virtues make sense from an individual perspective rather than a group.
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    Because it demotivates people. The thing about capitalism, which I feel is not widely understood, it's that as a participant, you're meant to compete, but you're not meant to win. The need for money to sustain your lifestyle is what drives people to productive work; competition is what drives companies to optimize. But the moment someone wins - a person becomes rich, a company becomes a monopoly - they actually become a problem. At best, they're no longer working and optimizing. At worst, they can disrupt lives of a lot of people. The promise of great wealth is phony by design.
floodyberry- 10y ago
When you're self reporting how you think you accomplished something and you leave information out, it's not cheating, it's leaving information out. It doesn't mean it's intentional, but not being intentional doesn't make the left out information irrelevant.

6stringmerc 10y ago

I found DistroKid through here, not Fandalism. Actually, of all the sites I follow, I can't say I actually recall visiting that one on the regular (ex: versus Billboard Biz or Complete Music Update).