5 ms·

It's a really amazing case of a business going into a crowded space and building a solution to what anyone would have called a thoroughly-solved problem and sti

by tootie 4y ago

It's a really amazing case of a business going into a crowded space and building a solution to what anyone would have called a thoroughly-solved problem and still managed to disrupt it. They didn't really "invent" anything or make a new market, they just did something better than everyone else. And, I think, got incredibly lucky with entering the market at the exact right time.

warent 4y ago
It is curious to wonder how they managed to lead the company this successfully. How often do young founders actually hang onto leadership this long without either imploding or being replaced? Why are the Collison brothers different?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- ralston3 4y ago
  IMO...value. I personally feel like it's always easier for founders to stay on when their product provides actual, tangible, objective value. It clearly shows that they (the founders) sort've know their market, and know what they're doing (to some degree). When that's the case, I feel investors are happy to get out of the way and watch their equity rise. Whereas when a service isn't providing any real differential value, it's a lot easier to try to swap out the founders for the MBA/finance/corporate type that doesn't really know the market/audience.
- itsoktocry 4y ago
  >How often do young founders actually hang onto leadership this long without either imploding or being replaced? Why are the Collison brothers different? Stripe is great, so I assume these guys are good leaders. But Stripe was founded in 2011. Are there not plenty of young founders of that era "hanging on" to their leadership? I don't see anything particularly out of the ordinary here.
- samwillis 4y ago
  I think it's to some extent the good old Irish charm, and I say that as someone married to a much better Irish other half.
jonny_eh 4y ago
> they just did something better than everyone else Wow, HN's ability to dismiss and diminish major accomplishments continues to astound me.
- renewiltord 4y ago
  Better execution is considered the biggest compliment in the industry. Novel ideas are sort of considered a passé path to success. In that context, it sounds more like idolization than insult.
- bcbrown 4y ago
  You think saying "a really amazing case of a business [that executed] better than everyone else" is dismissive and diminishing?
  - jonny_eh 4y ago
    "Just" implies it wasn't a big deal.
    - danielmarkbruce 4y ago
      Warren Buffett just focuses on business all day. Tom Brady just thinks about football all day. The word 'just' is used in many cases to show someone did one thing and not other things. Doing lots of things is often just stupid.
      - ZephyrBlu 4y ago
        "just" has an implication, "only" or "solely" would be more neutral words.
        danielmarkbruce 4y ago
        Nope, people say "just" all the time for this case. You might think they should use "only" or "solely", but they say "just" frequently. Sometimes "just" does have an implication. If you assume the writer isn't being a dick, it's easy to see what they meant.
ttcbj 4y ago
While I see your point, I went through several scammy credit card processing solutions (one from an intuit subsidiary, one from a local bank) back around 2013 before I found stripe. You wouldn’t think that “it’s easy to use and not scammy” Would have been an innovation, but at that stage, I think it was.
- tempnow987 4y ago
  Man, we got burned with a "contracted" credit card solution, complete with horrible support, service and billing.
SkyPuncher 4y ago
I've learned over the years that most people overlook the bottom part of the iceberg. Stripe nailed everything else about the business. They made everything that sucked about old credit card processors good. It wasn't just the transaction. It was everything that led up to it (simple integration, debugging, good dev documentation, sane APIs, etc) and everything after. Eventually, they even made the transactions better with alternative methods, fraud, and recurring payment pass-through.
danielmarkbruce 4y ago
Is that amazing? It might actually be the standard way. Google - better search. Search was "solved", just not well. Zoom - better video chat. It was "solved", not well. Amazon - they've never done anything original, always just better. Online books was done, colo servers were a thing. Apple - same. Telsa - better electric cars. Airbnb - better short term rental market. Salesforce - better CRM. Snowflake - better data warehouse. And on and on and on. It seems nobody actually wants new things. They seem to want better on some dimension. There are exceptions, but they are few.
- qeternity 4y ago
  I think you’re selectively choosing what constitutes “new” vs. “better”. As Henry Ford said, if you ask people what they want they’ll tell you a faster horse. It’s not as if the automobile wasn’t new and revolutionary, but nobody cares about cars. They care about getting around. And a way to get around that was faster, more powerful and more reliable…that was new. It’s the details that matter. If you take your view, the moon landing was hardly anything noteworthy because animals have been migrating to new lands for millions of year.
  - danielmarkbruce 4y ago
    You just noted an exception, and they exist. The moon landing wasn't a product. "New" v "better" isn't saying something is or isn't noteworthy. Tesla is a hell of a story. So is SpaceX. So is Apple. So is Google. Amazing technical leaps. All noteworthy, all creating immense value.

by tootie 4y ago

warent 4y ago

It is curious to wonder how they managed to lead the company this successfully. How often do young founders actually hang onto leadership this long without either imploding or being replaced? Why are the Collison brothers different?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ralston3 4y ago
IMO...value. I personally feel like it's always easier for founders to stay on when their product provides actual, tangible, objective value. It clearly shows that they (the founders) sort've know their market, and know what they're doing (to some degree). When that's the case, I feel investors are happy to get out of the way and watch their equity rise. Whereas when a service isn't providing any real differential value, it's a lot easier to try to swap out the founders for the MBA/finance/corporate type that doesn't really know the market/audience.
itsoktocry 4y ago
>How often do young founders actually hang onto leadership this long without either imploding or being replaced? Why are the Collison brothers different? Stripe is great, so I assume these guys are good leaders. But Stripe was founded in 2011. Are there not plenty of young founders of that era "hanging on" to their leadership? I don't see anything particularly out of the ordinary here.
samwillis 4y ago
I think it's to some extent the good old Irish charm, and I say that as someone married to a much better Irish other half.

jonny_eh 4y ago

> they just did something better than everyone else Wow, HN's ability to dismiss and diminish major accomplishments continues to astound me.

renewiltord 4y ago
Better execution is considered the biggest compliment in the industry. Novel ideas are sort of considered a passé path to success. In that context, it sounds more like idolization than insult.
bcbrown 4y ago
You think saying "a really amazing case of a business [that executed] better than everyone else" is dismissive and diminishing?
- jonny_eh 4y ago
  "Just" implies it wasn't a big deal.
  - danielmarkbruce 4y ago
    Warren Buffett just focuses on business all day. Tom Brady just thinks about football all day. The word 'just' is used in many cases to show someone did one thing and not other things. Doing lots of things is often just stupid.
    - ZephyrBlu 4y ago
      "just" has an implication, "only" or "solely" would be more neutral words.
      - danielmarkbruce 4y ago
        Nope, people say "just" all the time for this case. You might think they should use "only" or "solely", but they say "just" frequently. Sometimes "just" does have an implication. If you assume the writer isn't being a dick, it's easy to see what they meant.

ttcbj 4y ago

While I see your point, I went through several scammy credit card processing solutions (one from an intuit subsidiary, one from a local bank) back around 2013 before I found stripe. You wouldn’t think that “it’s easy to use and not scammy” Would have been an innovation, but at that stage, I think it was.

tempnow987 4y ago
Man, we got burned with a "contracted" credit card solution, complete with horrible support, service and billing.

SkyPuncher 4y ago

I've learned over the years that most people overlook the bottom part of the iceberg. Stripe nailed everything else about the business. They made everything that sucked about old credit card processors good. It wasn't just the transaction. It was everything that led up to it (simple integration, debugging, good dev documentation, sane APIs, etc) and everything after. Eventually, they even made the transactions better with alternative methods, fraud, and recurring payment pass-through.

danielmarkbruce 4y ago

Is that amazing? It might actually be the standard way. Google - better search. Search was "solved", just not well. Zoom - better video chat. It was "solved", not well. Amazon - they've never done anything original, always just better. Online books was done, colo servers were a thing. Apple - same. Telsa - better electric cars. Airbnb - better short term rental market. Salesforce - better CRM. Snowflake - better data warehouse. And on and on and on. It seems nobody actually wants new things. They seem to want better on some dimension. There are exceptions, but they are few.

qeternity 4y ago
I think you’re selectively choosing what constitutes “new” vs. “better”. As Henry Ford said, if you ask people what they want they’ll tell you a faster horse. It’s not as if the automobile wasn’t new and revolutionary, but nobody cares about cars. They care about getting around. And a way to get around that was faster, more powerful and more reliable…that was new. It’s the details that matter. If you take your view, the moon landing was hardly anything noteworthy because animals have been migrating to new lands for millions of year.
- danielmarkbruce 4y ago
  You just noted an exception, and they exist. The moon landing wasn't a product. "New" v "better" isn't saying something is or isn't noteworthy. Tesla is a hell of a story. So is SpaceX. So is Apple. So is Google. Amazing technical leaps. All noteworthy, all creating immense value.