4 ms·

The #1 advice on this paper (experiences, not things) is very relevant for the HN community. A corollary is "Your startup needs to sell experiences, not featur

The #1 advice on this paper (experiences, not things) is very relevant for the HN community. A corollary is "Your startup needs to sell experiences, not features": http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2662671 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2662671 Previous discussions ("Money = Happiness, but when it buys experiences"): http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=482036 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=482036 "Spend money on experiences, not possessions" http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1825525 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1825525

skrebbel 15y ago
> "Your startup needs to sell experiences, not features" Eh, What about B2B startups? What about any utility application? Say, internet search? I'm going to kill Google (and Gabriel Weinberg) if they turn their search engine into an "experience". Seriously, guys, can we stop the "startup == social local friend to friend mobile app thing" thing already?
- lolcraft 15y ago
  Early Google was an experience. It gave you a few links in a very minimal layout, and that was it. Yahoo and Altavista gave you incredibly big portals with lots of features that didn't really go to bed together. They lost, because theirs were a shitty experience. The iPod is an experience. Most early MP3s had the same or more features, but the iPod killed them, because it provided an interesting experience of listening to music. Amazon is just another Walmart, too. But with a buyer experience that's much better than anyone else's. Same thing with Facebook vs. MySpace. Or Steam vs. Origin vs. your local videogame shop.
- GFischer 15y ago
  Sorry, I was just trying to dig up the startup-related insights from the study :) What I guess the article meant to say in another way is that your startup needs to focus on its value proposition, “How will buying/using this ... make my life better?”. In the case of both Google and DDG, what they deliver to the user. It's no accident Google has Instant, previews, etc (and DDG has DuckDuckHack)... it's all about making the search experience better.
  - skrebbel 15y ago
    Hmm, i see your point. Yet, I don't think "user experience" and the article's "experience" are at all the same thing. They're related, but only very remotely, IMHO. Therefore I misunderstood your comment.
- seanp2k2 15y ago
  Search /is/ an experience, and it always has been. Google is just making that experience suck lately. UX is the most important feature. Canonical example: Apple. Apple "gets" usability. No other pc manufacturer comes close. Their methods are dubious and I don't agree with all of them, but their stuff works nicer than anything else right now (for the latest number of lay people.) Other pc mfgs don't even try to design beautiful, elegant hardware and market it to everyone. They think that everyone wants cheap crap, so they deliver and iterate on that. All of Apple's offerings are premium, and you can't argue with their success. /people want nice stuff, not cheap plastic crap/ -- but it gets harder and harder to find nice stuff outside of Apple. Who still makes a laptop with a 1920x1200 display? Apple. HP and Lenovo did too last I checked, but the industry has largely moved to the cheaper-and-worse 16x9 panels. Apple also cares about obvious stuff that other mfgs ignore. Example: trackpad texture. Even on a $3500 gaming laptop from a specialty mfg, they don't get it and the trackpad is too grippy and hurts your finer after 5 minutes. BUILD QUALITY OR DON'T BUILD
  - gk1 15y ago
    Quality is just one corner of the triangle; speed and cost are the other two. Many people value speed or cost in their products more than quality (I am not just talking about computers). Your motto sounds great and all, but it's not how business works.
- reinhardt 15y ago
  Given the examples in sibling posts, we have to step back and define what we mean by "experience" as opposed to "utility". Saying "X is experience" for everything renders it pretty much meaningless.
neolefty 15y ago
That's a really thought-provoking point. How about the second item, "consumers should ... use their money to benefit others rather than themselves" -- any ideas for a startup there?
- arafalov 15y ago
  Yes. Tim O'Reilly keep saying that a good business should bring more value (to everybody) that it takes for itself. So, a startup should be looking at positive externalities of its business. KickStarter is making money, but it brings new products to life and enables funding models previously unachievable (e.g. a lot of Indie movies).
Dubplate 15y ago
Hey, "Your startup needs to sell experiences, not features" Check out our startup! http://blinkcollective.com/ http://blinkcollective.com/ Experiences, not products
- getsat 15y ago
  Your sign up link looks improperly styled. You might want to look at how these guys do theirs: https://squareup.com/ https://squareup.com/
- eevee 15y ago
  Yes, I am definitely experiencing your shameless self-promotion.
  - Dubplate 15y ago
    It's more of a relevant link....

skrebbel 15y ago

> "Your startup needs to sell experiences, not features" Eh, What about B2B startups? What about any utility application? Say, internet search? I'm going to kill Google (and Gabriel Weinberg) if they turn their search engine into an "experience". Seriously, guys, can we stop the "startup == social local friend to friend mobile app thing" thing already?

lolcraft 15y ago
Early Google was an experience. It gave you a few links in a very minimal layout, and that was it. Yahoo and Altavista gave you incredibly big portals with lots of features that didn't really go to bed together. They lost, because theirs were a shitty experience. The iPod is an experience. Most early MP3s had the same or more features, but the iPod killed them, because it provided an interesting experience of listening to music. Amazon is just another Walmart, too. But with a buyer experience that's much better than anyone else's. Same thing with Facebook vs. MySpace. Or Steam vs. Origin vs. your local videogame shop.
GFischer 15y ago
Sorry, I was just trying to dig up the startup-related insights from the study :) What I guess the article meant to say in another way is that your startup needs to focus on its value proposition, “How will buying/using this ... make my life better?”. In the case of both Google and DDG, what they deliver to the user. It's no accident Google has Instant, previews, etc (and DDG has DuckDuckHack)... it's all about making the search experience better.
- skrebbel 15y ago
  Hmm, i see your point. Yet, I don't think "user experience" and the article's "experience" are at all the same thing. They're related, but only very remotely, IMHO. Therefore I misunderstood your comment.
seanp2k2 15y ago
Search /is/ an experience, and it always has been. Google is just making that experience suck lately. UX is the most important feature. Canonical example: Apple. Apple "gets" usability. No other pc manufacturer comes close. Their methods are dubious and I don't agree with all of them, but their stuff works nicer than anything else right now (for the latest number of lay people.) Other pc mfgs don't even try to design beautiful, elegant hardware and market it to everyone. They think that everyone wants cheap crap, so they deliver and iterate on that. All of Apple's offerings are premium, and you can't argue with their success. /people want nice stuff, not cheap plastic crap/ -- but it gets harder and harder to find nice stuff outside of Apple. Who still makes a laptop with a 1920x1200 display? Apple. HP and Lenovo did too last I checked, but the industry has largely moved to the cheaper-and-worse 16x9 panels. Apple also cares about obvious stuff that other mfgs ignore. Example: trackpad texture. Even on a $3500 gaming laptop from a specialty mfg, they don't get it and the trackpad is too grippy and hurts your finer after 5 minutes. BUILD QUALITY OR DON'T BUILD
- gk1 15y ago
  Quality is just one corner of the triangle; speed and cost are the other two. Many people value speed or cost in their products more than quality (I am not just talking about computers). Your motto sounds great and all, but it's not how business works.
reinhardt 15y ago
Given the examples in sibling posts, we have to step back and define what we mean by "experience" as opposed to "utility". Saying "X is experience" for everything renders it pretty much meaningless.

neolefty 15y ago

That's a really thought-provoking point. How about the second item, "consumers should ... use their money to benefit others rather than themselves" -- any ideas for a startup there?

arafalov 15y ago
Yes. Tim O'Reilly keep saying that a good business should bring more value (to everybody) that it takes for itself. So, a startup should be looking at positive externalities of its business. KickStarter is making money, but it brings new products to life and enables funding models previously unachievable (e.g. a lot of Indie movies).

Dubplate 15y ago

Hey, "Your startup needs to sell experiences, not features" Check out our startup! http://blinkcollective.com/ http://blinkcollective.com/ Experiences, not products

getsat 15y ago
Your sign up link looks improperly styled. You might want to look at how these guys do theirs: https://squareup.com/ https://squareup.com/
eevee 15y ago
Yes, I am definitely experiencing your shameless self-promotion.
- Dubplate 15y ago
  It's more of a relevant link....