3 ms·
That’s a rather simplistic notion of luck. The success or failure of any new business is largely up to luck, simply due to the number of unknowns: market demand
by jf- 8y ago
That’s a rather simplistic notion of luck. The success or failure of any new business is largely up to luck, simply due to the number of unknowns: market demand, marketing strategy, economic conditions, access to resources, access to talent. It is also not a fact that if you build a perfect, shining example of the thing you had in mind that it’s automatically successful.
And people aren’t ‘terribly afraid of freedom’, what does that even mean?
- hueving 8y agoOther than a change in 'economic conditions', the rest of those issues can be avoided with adequate business research. Just because most technologists don't doesn't mean it's actually such an unknown.
- jf- 8y agoProve it.
- hueving 8y agoThere exists entire industries of market analysts to give you things like TAM and other critical information to avoid creating a solution to problems nobody has.
- jf- 8y agoBy this logic any large company can guarantee the success of any product it launches by throwing money at analysts. It should be obvious this is not the case.
- JackFr 8y ago> the rest of those issues can be avoided with adequate business research. That's simply wrong.
- hueving 8y agoIf you had an idea to improve on the telegraph that makes it 15% faster for operators, would you start a telegraph business right now? Why or why not?
- JackFr 8y agoI don't think i said research was valueless. Certainly risks can be mitigated with research, but I reject that they can be avoided entirely. If "with adequate business research, those can be avoided" is true, it can only be true as a syllogism where 'adequate' is defined to mean the research necessary not to fail, and any company which fails hasn't done 'adequate' research.