4 ms·

If your startup is based on execution and/or customer relationship sure this is true. However some startups are IP based in which case this is not true, now adm

If your startup is based on execution and/or customer relationship sure this is true. However some startups are IP based in which case this is not true, now admittedly there is a low % of IP based startups on HN. Some startups can execute better than you and can be better funded. Remember Hojoki anyone, nope - Slack moved fast got the momentum, scaled and wham! Hojoki used to be better than Slack btw. However if you operate in the public arena most people will know or guess your plan as soon as you spin up your MVP anyway :) Right now down to the elephant in the room. Apple regularly release products/features that look remarkably like 3rd party apps, but not enough to be sued. So yep, idea stolen, implemented and market cornered by a virtual monopoly. The truth is a complicated thing and the word Nobody is just factually inaccurate. I'd go with: 'You're more like to fail executing than have your idea stolen.' :)

brudgers 11y ago
Another way of putting it is any startup that steals your idea is probably as likely to fail as you are.
- ekianjo 11y ago
  That's not at all what he is saying.
  - brudgers 11y ago
    It's a directly drawn from the premise that each startup is likely to fail. Stealing an idea doesn't make a company more likely to execute well and having an idea doesn't make a company less likely to.
    - ekianjo 11y ago
      Execution can make a difference on how likely you are to fail. There are so many examples out there where one execution won over even if the original idea was the same.
      - reagency 11y ago
        The point is that Execution is the part that matters, not the idea.
  - neilellis 11y ago
    You're right it isn't. But also he's right, that the odds are against all startups - so a competitor also has the odds against them too. In an unproven market this is so much more true! In regards to comments about IP :- compression and encryption are two obvious IP led areas. But also those working in the cutting 'technical' edge - such as high speed trading may well have solid IP. The thing is a lot of SV based startups (a lot, not all!) are driven to solve customer/logistic problems not technical problems so they are less likely to have IP - unless (grrrr...) you count business practises as IP. However startups out of a University incubator are more likely to be solving technical challenges and therefore have richer IP. As seen by the comments :-) The light is shone so strongly on public facing SV startups it's easy for us to forget how many different types of startups there are and how they execute differently. For example most customer facing startups don't need stealth mode, they need MVP. Not true if your product is IP lead, in which case you need to be stealth while you secure IP rights and test the product internally. There's a lot of massively useful advice coming out of SV - proven by startup after startup - but there is also a tendency to view all startups the same. The very fact that they are different means you need to have smart folk at the helm to navigate their own unique course based on the experiences of others.
baddox 11y ago
> there is a low % of IP based startups on HN I actually can't think of any, other than video game companies, and even then, it's probably more about execution/marketing/SEO than the IP itself.
- jldugger 11y ago
  The university I work for has a startup incubator that is like 90 percent patent driven.
  - gregpilling 11y ago
    the university my wife works for spends a lot of time and effort promoting their patent portfolio, but I see little evidence in the real world.
  - bad_user 11y ago
    So patent trolls?
    - superuser2 11y ago
      University IP based endeavors tend to be non-software areas where patents are legitimately results of very expensive research endeavors staffed by multiple PhDs, not "using a database engine to store a wish list." They do resemble patent trolls in that most of their business is licensing, not directly making products. However it is more based on selling: "Hey we have this cool technology, license it!" rather than showing up out of nowhere and extorting settlement.
    - reagency 11y ago
      More that the university gets a cut by licensing patents to the employee inventors, in exchange for incubation support. Not trolling the general business public. For example, Google paid Stanford something like $1B in exchange for the patents of work developed by Googlers at the university.
- hyperpallium 11y ago

brudgers 11y ago

Another way of putting it is any startup that steals your idea is probably as likely to fail as you are.

ekianjo 11y ago
That's not at all what he is saying.
- brudgers 11y ago
  It's a directly drawn from the premise that each startup is likely to fail. Stealing an idea doesn't make a company more likely to execute well and having an idea doesn't make a company less likely to.
  - ekianjo 11y ago
    Execution can make a difference on how likely you are to fail. There are so many examples out there where one execution won over even if the original idea was the same.
    - reagency 11y ago
      The point is that Execution is the part that matters, not the idea.
- neilellis 11y ago
  You're right it isn't. But also he's right, that the odds are against all startups - so a competitor also has the odds against them too. In an unproven market this is so much more true! In regards to comments about IP :- compression and encryption are two obvious IP led areas. But also those working in the cutting 'technical' edge - such as high speed trading may well have solid IP. The thing is a lot of SV based startups (a lot, not all!) are driven to solve customer/logistic problems not technical problems so they are less likely to have IP - unless (grrrr...) you count business practises as IP. However startups out of a University incubator are more likely to be solving technical challenges and therefore have richer IP. As seen by the comments :-) The light is shone so strongly on public facing SV startups it's easy for us to forget how many different types of startups there are and how they execute differently. For example most customer facing startups don't need stealth mode, they need MVP. Not true if your product is IP lead, in which case you need to be stealth while you secure IP rights and test the product internally. There's a lot of massively useful advice coming out of SV - proven by startup after startup - but there is also a tendency to view all startups the same. The very fact that they are different means you need to have smart folk at the helm to navigate their own unique course based on the experiences of others.

baddox 11y ago

> there is a low % of IP based startups on HN I actually can't think of any, other than video game companies, and even then, it's probably more about execution/marketing/SEO than the IP itself.

jldugger 11y ago
The university I work for has a startup incubator that is like 90 percent patent driven.
- gregpilling 11y ago
  the university my wife works for spends a lot of time and effort promoting their patent portfolio, but I see little evidence in the real world.
- bad_user 11y ago
  So patent trolls?
  - superuser2 11y ago
    University IP based endeavors tend to be non-software areas where patents are legitimately results of very expensive research endeavors staffed by multiple PhDs, not "using a database engine to store a wish list." They do resemble patent trolls in that most of their business is licensing, not directly making products. However it is more based on selling: "Hey we have this cool technology, license it!" rather than showing up out of nowhere and extorting settlement.
  - reagency 11y ago
    More that the university gets a cut by licensing patents to the employee inventors, in exchange for incubation support. Not trolling the general business public. For example, Google paid Stanford something like $1B in exchange for the patents of work developed by Googlers at the university.
hyperpallium 11y ago