4 ms·
I'm one of the founders of Causal (#12 on the list) — this is one of the key things we've tried to address in a couple of ways: 1. Ranges vs point estimates: i
by refrigerator 6y ago
I'm one of the founders of Causal (#12 on the list) — this is one of the key things we've tried to address in a couple of ways:
1. Ranges vs point estimates: instead of assumptions being fixed values (e.g. my 'Growth Rate' is 10%), you can define ranges like '5% to 15%', and we run thousands of simulations to figure out the actual range of plausible outcomes. We also make it trivial to set up different discrete scenarios.
2. Interactive dashboards where you can tweak assumptions: if you think an assumption is too ambitious/unrealistic, you can actually just go in and change it yourself to see what happens. These changes don't get saved to the model, and there's no chance of accidentally breaking anything.
Here's an example: https://my.causal.app/models/1269 https://my.causal.app/models/1269
- Silhouette 6y agoSure. I guess my point is that even picking ranges, your error bars are so wide before you have any concrete data on revenues and product-market fit that I don't believe you can draw any intelligent conclusions anyway. Once you get something into market, and you start spending and making money, and you start hearing back from paying customers and running experiments and iterating, then you can get a meaningful sense of how your product or service is going to perform and choose ranges that might not be so wide as to be completely useless.