4 ms·

Markets reward useful uniqueness. Long-term focus yields mastery few have achieved. A path even more likely to lead to success is combining two types of expert

Markets reward useful uniqueness. Long-term focus yields mastery few have achieved. A path even more likely to lead to success is combining two types of expertise in a fruitful way. In today's global economy, it is very hard to be among the world's top 100 or 1,000 for a particular skill, even with years of practice. It is quite possible to be among the top 1,000,000 in each of the two skills that, when usefully integrated, result in a fairly unique output or skill set. To elaborate on YC's motto: Creative integration toward things people want.

hyperpallium 8y ago
Markets reward useful defendable uniqueness. Making something people want is a foundation, but no good if someone else copies it (and perhaps does it better amd markets it better through capitalization). I think the YC playbook is if you keep improving it, it's hard for copiers to catch up (so don't worry about competitors/copiers in themselves, look fotward, not behind you). There's also a market advantage of being first - people like that, and you've have longer for news to spread about you.
- nopinsight 8y ago
  Good elaboration. You could say defendability is implied by uniqueness. Once it is copied it is no longer unique. Better to have it spelled out though. I used the word ‘toward’ to hint that there is no perfect market fit. One can only continually improve toward the ideal, which also keeps changing. I think we largely agree. :)
movedx 8y ago
> In today's global economy, it is very hard to be among the world's top 100 or 1,000 for a particular skill, even with years of practice. Why do you need to be in the top 1,000? Why do you need to be in the top 100,000? If I have a market of 5,000 people around me who want my service, why is it not OK to be the best you can be for 100 of those people paying you $5,000 a year (or some other amount)? If I'm doing my part for those 2% and someone else, perhaps a large company, is doing the same for 50%, what's the problem? :-)
- nopinsight 8y ago
  Your scenario assumes that larger competitors, possibly from other localities and nations, will not come in and provide services as well as you can at a lower price (perhaps by subsidizing at first to gain market share). With network effects, economy of scale, and commoditization of more and more products and services, larger players have stronger advantages than ever. In the long run, how do you secure a niche that can provide you with significant income per customer when those same niches tend to be lucrative for larger players as well? Examples: There are fewer independent grocery stores, book stores, and pharmacists than ever in the US. It is true that if your services are fairly immuned to those effects, it might be possible. Medicine and software consulting are two areas I can think of right now. However, those skills also require substantial investment/time to develop and some entrepreneurial skills to monetize well. Do you have examples of occupations that can achieve success with a skill level of 8 out of 10?
  - movedx 8y ago
    > Your scenario assumes that larger competitors, possibly from other localities and nations, will not come in and provide services as well as you can at a lower price (perhaps by subsidizing at first to gain market share). This doesn't apply to all industries nor all products and services that can be offered. I suggest reading, "Small Giants." Not everyone wants to do business with big players. Some people are forced to due to lower prices and their diminished funds, but not everyone is in that boat. Small, privately owned business can operate just fine surrounded by big players, especially when customer service and customer satisfaction absolutely smashes the big player across the street. Suggested reading: "The Millionaire Next", which clearly indicates that a lot of wealthy families got wealthy providing professional services to other wealthy families. You have to start somewhere and at some scale, and once you reach a certain point, you can stop. It's OK not to want to be the next billionaire. > Do you have examples of occupations that can achieve success with a skill level of 8 out of 10? Computer programming. 6/10 in London will get you lucrative contracts you can use to bootstrap a side business with part of the proceeds. London is so dense and business so freely flowing, that the GFC did next to nothing for most of us in this industry. We still got our AUD$1,200/day payslips. DevOps. 7/10 would get you a huge daily rate (like I'm on now) and that can be used to bootstrap a side business (like I'm doing now.) Driving Instructor. I remember my instructor back home in England. Lawrence. Lovely guy. Good instructor. Maybe 7-8/10. AUD$35/hour for a driving lesson. Had so much business he was hard to get a booking with and could pick and choose his clients. Why? Because every year a new 16 year old boy/girl entered the arena and wanted to learn to drive. Tens of thousands of them from the surrounding towns. Despite the very large instructor schools having hundreds of instructors all over the country, Lawrence was "successful" and continues to be. Cafes, bookstores (despite what you said earlier), and those kind of businesses (those that can be operate by a single business owner) easily stay in business here in Australia and certainly at home in England. Overall, I think you'll find the problems you've outlined to be mostly exclusive to and quite excessively bad in the US, but it's not the case in the UK and Australia (to the same degree.) I'm going to bet a lot of Europe is the same as AU/UK, too. Yes big players exists here, but check out this documentary about why Starbucks failed here in Australia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FGUkxn5kZQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FGUkxn5kZQ -- what was it you were saying about economy of scale?

hyperpallium 8y ago

Markets reward useful defendable uniqueness. Making something people want is a foundation, but no good if someone else copies it (and perhaps does it better amd markets it better through capitalization). I think the YC playbook is if you keep improving it, it's hard for copiers to catch up (so don't worry about competitors/copiers in themselves, look fotward, not behind you). There's also a market advantage of being first - people like that, and you've have longer for news to spread about you.

nopinsight 8y ago
Good elaboration. You could say defendability is implied by uniqueness. Once it is copied it is no longer unique. Better to have it spelled out though. I used the word ‘toward’ to hint that there is no perfect market fit. One can only continually improve toward the ideal, which also keeps changing. I think we largely agree. :)

movedx 8y ago

> In today's global economy, it is very hard to be among the world's top 100 or 1,000 for a particular skill, even with years of practice. Why do you need to be in the top 1,000? Why do you need to be in the top 100,000? If I have a market of 5,000 people around me who want my service, why is it not OK to be the best you can be for 100 of those people paying you $5,000 a year (or some other amount)? If I'm doing my part for those 2% and someone else, perhaps a large company, is doing the same for 50%, what's the problem? :-)

nopinsight 8y ago
Your scenario assumes that larger competitors, possibly from other localities and nations, will not come in and provide services as well as you can at a lower price (perhaps by subsidizing at first to gain market share). With network effects, economy of scale, and commoditization of more and more products and services, larger players have stronger advantages than ever. In the long run, how do you secure a niche that can provide you with significant income per customer when those same niches tend to be lucrative for larger players as well? Examples: There are fewer independent grocery stores, book stores, and pharmacists than ever in the US. It is true that if your services are fairly immuned to those effects, it might be possible. Medicine and software consulting are two areas I can think of right now. However, those skills also require substantial investment/time to develop and some entrepreneurial skills to monetize well. Do you have examples of occupations that can achieve success with a skill level of 8 out of 10?
- movedx 8y ago
  > Your scenario assumes that larger competitors, possibly from other localities and nations, will not come in and provide services as well as you can at a lower price (perhaps by subsidizing at first to gain market share). This doesn't apply to all industries nor all products and services that can be offered. I suggest reading, "Small Giants." Not everyone wants to do business with big players. Some people are forced to due to lower prices and their diminished funds, but not everyone is in that boat. Small, privately owned business can operate just fine surrounded by big players, especially when customer service and customer satisfaction absolutely smashes the big player across the street. Suggested reading: "The Millionaire Next", which clearly indicates that a lot of wealthy families got wealthy providing professional services to other wealthy families. You have to start somewhere and at some scale, and once you reach a certain point, you can stop. It's OK not to want to be the next billionaire. > Do you have examples of occupations that can achieve success with a skill level of 8 out of 10? Computer programming. 6/10 in London will get you lucrative contracts you can use to bootstrap a side business with part of the proceeds. London is so dense and business so freely flowing, that the GFC did next to nothing for most of us in this industry. We still got our AUD$1,200/day payslips. DevOps. 7/10 would get you a huge daily rate (like I'm on now) and that can be used to bootstrap a side business (like I'm doing now.) Driving Instructor. I remember my instructor back home in England. Lawrence. Lovely guy. Good instructor. Maybe 7-8/10. AUD$35/hour for a driving lesson. Had so much business he was hard to get a booking with and could pick and choose his clients. Why? Because every year a new 16 year old boy/girl entered the arena and wanted to learn to drive. Tens of thousands of them from the surrounding towns. Despite the very large instructor schools having hundreds of instructors all over the country, Lawrence was "successful" and continues to be. Cafes, bookstores (despite what you said earlier), and those kind of businesses (those that can be operate by a single business owner) easily stay in business here in Australia and certainly at home in England. Overall, I think you'll find the problems you've outlined to be mostly exclusive to and quite excessively bad in the US, but it's not the case in the UK and Australia (to the same degree.) I'm going to bet a lot of Europe is the same as AU/UK, too. Yes big players exists here, but check out this documentary about why Starbucks failed here in Australia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FGUkxn5kZQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FGUkxn5kZQ -- what was it you were saying about economy of scale?