4 ms·
Agree this is a great point. Sadly, companies that are good at two things have a very difficult time getting funded. My own company, Fohr, has made it to the f
by erichocean 15y ago
Agree this is a great point.
Sadly, companies that are good at two things have a very difficult time getting funded. My own company, Fohr, has made it to the full partner round at one very highly-respected VC firm, but because we're in two industries (tech and film), and innovating in both, we're in a no-mans land for funding. :(
- InclinedPlane 15y agoIt's not just about diversity of competencies. It's about complementary but dissimilar skills. Apple is able to make beloved consumer electronics because they mesh aesthetic sensibilities and design with quality hw&sw construction. Google succeeded because better algorithms (page rank) led to higher quality results and good software engineering techniques (map-reduce, sharding) married to novel data center operations (heavily automated consumer hw based servers) allowed them to crank out results faster and cheaper than the competition, making ad revenue all that more potent and enabling lower margin ads (such as adwords). Without a solid track record of success I can imagine it might be difficult to convince outsiders of the merits of a company that is more unusual than its competitors. I think the solution to that is the same as always, keep efficient and execute well until you acquire the profit or the funding to grow.