4 ms·
The author is completely missing the point of lean and minimal viable product. His assertion that Google would only be a "small search player" if they'd gone th
by nkohari 17y ago
The author is completely missing the point of lean and minimal viable product. His assertion that Google would only be a "small search player" if they'd gone the lean startup route is way off, because Google already had their MVP built by the time they took their VC money. There's nothing wrong with taking money to accelerate business growth; it's just dangerous to have unlimited resources up front when you're still trying to figure out what the market wants.
- robmay 17y agoAccording to the lean startup presentation given by Eric Ries at Web2.0 expo, (http://www.web2expo.com/webexsf2009/public/schedule/detail/7789 http://www.web2expo.com/webexsf2009/public/schedule/detail/7...) one key point is to "1. Identify a profitable business model faster and cheaper than your competitors." Google took VC money without having a clear revenue model at the time. So I would argue that they weren't a lean startup. And anyway, I would say MVP and lean startup are different but related concepts.
- nkohari 17y agoI would argue Google had identified the profitable business model, but needed VC money in order to implement it effectively. Their minimum viable product (their search technology) was already developed at that point. I agree that MVP and lean startup are different but (very closely) related. (Specifically, you can't have the latter without the former.) But what's your point?