4 ms·

Thanks. Probably you need to work on the idea more or this person just didn't see it. Usually there's a split second thing, they either see it or don't. The re

Thanks. Probably you need to work on the idea more or this person just didn't see it. Usually there's a split second thing, they either see it or don't. The rest is dotting the i's and crossing the t's. >> ""Why wouldn't I just use [most popular competitor]"?" Unless you were asking them for $1 billion this is pretty dumb. You don't need to be #1 or #2 to make money, and features change after going live.

_pius 15y ago
>> ""Why wouldn't I just use [most popular competitor]"?" Unless you were asking them for $1 billion this is pretty dumb. I wouldn't say it's necessarily dumb. You fail if you're pitching a search engine and you don't have a compelling answer to "Why wouldn't people just use Google?"
- itswindy 15y ago
  A search engine needs $100+ million to $xx billions to create and a very different angle to market since Google is bookmarked and people go there to search for stuff. You see Blekko trying to get some press by saying that they deleted 1 million domains from Serps? As if that makes sense But yeah, if he wanted to create a web search engine, then he was asked the right question.
brk 15y ago
Unless you were asking them for $1 billion this is pretty dumb. You don't need to be #1 or #2 to make money, and features change after going live. No. The question is usually meant to extract from the presenter a concise explanation of what will make their product better than the current incumbent. If you can't articulate the value of your idea in 15 seconds or less, it needs more thought. And while you don't have to be #1 or #2 to make money, few (if any) investors want to invest in a #3 or #7 offering. Also, you kinda DO need to be #1, or at least have every bit of belief and conviction that you will be #1 in some short order. Raising money to build a me-too is "dumb". And people still get sucked into the fallacy of "it's an $X Billion market, and if we can get just 3% of X we will win". You won't get 3%. You'll get 80%, or nothing (measured over a business life timeline, not a short-term sample).

_pius 15y ago

>> ""Why wouldn't I just use [most popular competitor]"?" Unless you were asking them for $1 billion this is pretty dumb. I wouldn't say it's necessarily dumb. You fail if you're pitching a search engine and you don't have a compelling answer to "Why wouldn't people just use Google?"

itswindy 15y ago
A search engine needs $100+ million to $xx billions to create and a very different angle to market since Google is bookmarked and people go there to search for stuff. You see Blekko trying to get some press by saying that they deleted 1 million domains from Serps? As if that makes sense But yeah, if he wanted to create a web search engine, then he was asked the right question.

brk 15y ago

Unless you were asking them for $1 billion this is pretty dumb. You don't need to be #1 or #2 to make money, and features change after going live. No. The question is usually meant to extract from the presenter a concise explanation of what will make their product better than the current incumbent. If you can't articulate the value of your idea in 15 seconds or less, it needs more thought. And while you don't have to be #1 or #2 to make money, few (if any) investors want to invest in a #3 or #7 offering. Also, you kinda DO need to be #1, or at least have every bit of belief and conviction that you will be #1 in some short order. Raising money to build a me-too is "dumb". And people still get sucked into the fallacy of "it's an $X Billion market, and if we can get just 3% of X we will win". You won't get 3%. You'll get 80%, or nothing (measured over a business life timeline, not a short-term sample).