3 ms·

> build a product that I would like to use myself Yup, that's a first mistake, no? Shouldn't one build projects for others? It's a fine distinction, but getti

> build a product that I would like to use myself Yup, that's a first mistake, no? Shouldn't one build projects for others? It's a fine distinction, but getting that first customer is so important (or so I've heard).

bombcar 5y ago
It can work if coincidentally it's something others want and will pay for. That's sometimes the case, and those for whom it is often pontificate upon that coincidence.
justinclift 5y ago
On the other hand though, if you build a product that you'd like to use yourself then you might just discover an untapped niche. If it turns out not to be an untapped niche though, or not a good one... ugh. ;)
davidkuennen 5y ago
It's actually the opposite. You always build for yourself or someone comes to you and you build a product for him. Because that shows a real need. That's also how it worked for my product I'm very successful with (I built it for myself). If you try to think what other people would use and build a product around that you will most likely fail.
nonrandomstring 5y ago
>> build a product that I would like to use myself > Yup, that's a first mistake, no? No. The anti-pattern here is "Build something you think other people would want because you would like it." transforming into -> "Build something you think other people would want because you would like them to like it." (there's a subtle change) In three or four startups I've been associated with, this was going on. In psychology it's 'projection', and I think many young entrepreneurs fall into it. Indeed it's a common problem in digital technologies - the development of a feature by one group of people, who've become convinced another group want it, so push it against all evidence and market behaviour. Innovators can get enchanted by their own idea, and really want to be "creatively validated" by what they see as an "audience". This has gotten worse as software startups took on the characteristics of a "new pop music" business. Or, (with existing semi-succesful companies) they get mixed up in unconscious ulterior motives for wanting people to adopt an idea (such as displacing another product/paradigm they dislike, or effecting some kind of control over users (DRM etc).
simonh 5y ago
I think the mistake is actually “like to use”, it should be “want to pay for”. People wanting to use the product is not enough, people have to need the product so much they will pay money for it. The question the founder needs to answer is, how much would he pay to have this product. How much will they pay, and why will they do that?

bombcar 5y ago

It can work if coincidentally it's something others want and will pay for. That's sometimes the case, and those for whom it is often pontificate upon that coincidence.

justinclift 5y ago

On the other hand though, if you build a product that you'd like to use yourself then you might just discover an untapped niche. If it turns out not to be an untapped niche though, or not a good one... ugh. ;)

davidkuennen 5y ago

It's actually the opposite. You always build for yourself or someone comes to you and you build a product for him. Because that shows a real need. That's also how it worked for my product I'm very successful with (I built it for myself). If you try to think what other people would use and build a product around that you will most likely fail.

nonrandomstring 5y ago

>> build a product that I would like to use myself > Yup, that's a first mistake, no? No. The anti-pattern here is "Build something you think other people would want because you would like it." transforming into -> "Build something you think other people would want because you would like them to like it." (there's a subtle change) In three or four startups I've been associated with, this was going on. In psychology it's 'projection', and I think many young entrepreneurs fall into it. Indeed it's a common problem in digital technologies - the development of a feature by one group of people, who've become convinced another group want it, so push it against all evidence and market behaviour. Innovators can get enchanted by their own idea, and really want to be "creatively validated" by what they see as an "audience". This has gotten worse as software startups took on the characteristics of a "new pop music" business. Or, (with existing semi-succesful companies) they get mixed up in unconscious ulterior motives for wanting people to adopt an idea (such as displacing another product/paradigm they dislike, or effecting some kind of control over users (DRM etc).

simonh 5y ago

I think the mistake is actually “like to use”, it should be “want to pay for”. People wanting to use the product is not enough, people have to need the product so much they will pay money for it. The question the founder needs to answer is, how much would he pay to have this product. How much will they pay, and why will they do that?