I’d call changing the entire plan a “hard pivot.” I mean Slack started out as a video game (and Flickr - same game IIRC). But as the counter point, here’s an ar

I’d call changing the entire plan a “hard pivot.” I mean Slack started out as a video game (and Flickr - same game IIRC). But as the counter point, here’s an article that argues against doing that in favor of simply shutting down (including comments from a YC partner no less)! https://www.reforge.com/brief/why-hard-pivots-in-startups-are-deadly https://www.reforge.com/brief/why-hard-pivots-in-startups-ar... In this case though, the company is brand new. There aren’t a lot of employees involved. The valuations are low and most of the costs are sunk. There isn’t much to lose by trying something different. And they went from a video conferencing platform to managing scheduling for video conferences. It’s at least in the same ballpark. I guess what I’d say is that it is completely fair to criticize the team for the product they made. It isn’t something I’d spend money on and is in a crowded market with existing players (both free and paid). Not the best plan. But don’t criticize them for switching tracks. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t. But at this stage, I don’t see much downside in them trying.