4 ms·

"Other ideas he’d considered earlier were more like moonshots—hotels for homeless people, for example." I'm curious to know whether those moonshots were ideas

"Other ideas he’d considered earlier were more like moonshots—hotels for homeless people, for example." I'm curious to know whether those moonshots were ideas he decided to not pursue himself, or if he was talked out of those ideas by VCs? I've noticed a trend of some founders I know starting with big ambitious ideas and then, after getting into an incubator or talking to a few investors, somehow coming to the realization that [generic software company] is the idea they're actually really passionate about pursuing. Also happens after they talk to some professors, but professors at wharton are likely not representative of academia in general I think. It seems even within the circle of people that have access to VC and such opportunities, even if they aren't originally representative of your standard software startup, they tend to be pushed towards that, maybe explicitly, maybe implicitly, i really don't know.

woah 6y ago
I started a startup in the ISP space, and when I was running it, I was always kind of jealous of companies that just had a web app. Our target market was theoretically enormous, but in the day to day, adding customers was slow and difficult. It was easy to envy companies that just had to get people to click the sign up button, and then scaled with a few clicks in the AWS dashboard. Maybe founders and VCs end up making “generic software companies” because it’s easy money.
- seibelj 6y ago
  There are pros and cons to every business. The sweat and physical presence makes you sticky although slower growing. 99% of startup software companies break even or fail outright.
neltnerb 6y ago
My feeling is that people start out wanting to create a company either because it's trendy to do, or because they have a big idea they care about. I've rarely run into a business consultant, adviser, etc who doesn't immediately want to rein that in and advise that they do something smaller and profitable. It's not bad business advice, but I think that people just tend to get more conservative about what they're willing to try after being bombarded by consistent messaging that they should scale back their ambitions. I'm not sure I think that's bad honestly, a lot of ambitious ideas are really bad and usually more based in the assumption that the competition is stupid than what I'd call honest vision. It's good for the bottom line probably, but definitely sets an upper bound on how far you could take a project aimed at broad social welfare goals that wouldn't or shouldn't generate a profit. I've seen funding of non-profits (not sure if VC or not) but truly unsure how that works if investors actually expect something in return. They seem to have to rely on government grants and the largess of the already wealthy.
notahacker 6y ago
Is 'hotels for homeless' even a moonshot? The concept of providing short term accommodation for homeless people is hardly a novelty: it's just that since homeless people are hardly flush with cash it's mostly been the preserve of social enterprises, charities and local authorities The only thing about it that might be a 'moonshot' is trying to persuade VCs they can build a billion dollar business from the concept, but that's because it isn't a billion dollar business idea and it shouldn't really need a conversation with VCs to figure out they're not the funds you should be pitching if housing the homeless is your priority.
- rjkennedy98 6y ago
  > hotels for homeless you mean like homeless shelters?
  - notahacker 6y ago
    Yep. In the Covid era homeless people are even being sheltered in regular hotel chains.
    - averros 6y ago
      And we are paying for it, no matter if we want to or not. Most likely at multiples of regular room rates.
- redis_mlc 6y ago
  Homeless shelters aren't a new thing, but there is a wrinkle in SF where financial innovation might work. - SF homeless budget is $300 million per year, yet there's only 5,000 to 10,000 homeless people. So if you can do an Elon Musk and have the govt. bankroll your companies - US cities outside SF would love to bus their homeless to SF, and keep on trying. Instead of letting them off with a 1-way bus ticket, charge them $10,000 a head. - And as I have said previously, can't 50% of the SF homeless be helped with job and interview skills to get them off the streets, so the other mentally ill 50% can get focus? It's amazing how the SF Chronicle can always find 5 homeless people to do a lucid interview with.

woah 6y ago

I started a startup in the ISP space, and when I was running it, I was always kind of jealous of companies that just had a web app. Our target market was theoretically enormous, but in the day to day, adding customers was slow and difficult. It was easy to envy companies that just had to get people to click the sign up button, and then scaled with a few clicks in the AWS dashboard. Maybe founders and VCs end up making “generic software companies” because it’s easy money.

seibelj 6y ago
There are pros and cons to every business. The sweat and physical presence makes you sticky although slower growing. 99% of startup software companies break even or fail outright.

neltnerb 6y ago

My feeling is that people start out wanting to create a company either because it's trendy to do, or because they have a big idea they care about. I've rarely run into a business consultant, adviser, etc who doesn't immediately want to rein that in and advise that they do something smaller and profitable. It's not bad business advice, but I think that people just tend to get more conservative about what they're willing to try after being bombarded by consistent messaging that they should scale back their ambitions. I'm not sure I think that's bad honestly, a lot of ambitious ideas are really bad and usually more based in the assumption that the competition is stupid than what I'd call honest vision. It's good for the bottom line probably, but definitely sets an upper bound on how far you could take a project aimed at broad social welfare goals that wouldn't or shouldn't generate a profit. I've seen funding of non-profits (not sure if VC or not) but truly unsure how that works if investors actually expect something in return. They seem to have to rely on government grants and the largess of the already wealthy.

notahacker 6y ago

Is 'hotels for homeless' even a moonshot? The concept of providing short term accommodation for homeless people is hardly a novelty: it's just that since homeless people are hardly flush with cash it's mostly been the preserve of social enterprises, charities and local authorities The only thing about it that might be a 'moonshot' is trying to persuade VCs they can build a billion dollar business from the concept, but that's because it isn't a billion dollar business idea and it shouldn't really need a conversation with VCs to figure out they're not the funds you should be pitching if housing the homeless is your priority.

rjkennedy98 6y ago
> hotels for homeless you mean like homeless shelters?
- notahacker 6y ago
  Yep. In the Covid era homeless people are even being sheltered in regular hotel chains.
  - averros 6y ago
    And we are paying for it, no matter if we want to or not. Most likely at multiples of regular room rates.
redis_mlc 6y ago
Homeless shelters aren't a new thing, but there is a wrinkle in SF where financial innovation might work. - SF homeless budget is $300 million per year, yet there's only 5,000 to 10,000 homeless people. So if you can do an Elon Musk and have the govt. bankroll your companies - US cities outside SF would love to bus their homeless to SF, and keep on trying. Instead of letting them off with a 1-way bus ticket, charge them $10,000 a head. - And as I have said previously, can't 50% of the SF homeless be helped with job and interview skills to get them off the streets, so the other mentally ill 50% can get focus? It's amazing how the SF Chronicle can always find 5 homeless people to do a lucid interview with.