[davep]

Hello YE professionals

I believe this is a topic that hasn't been touched on recently.
It also pertains to my company not just a random thought.

It is weather to launch a website that is "first to market" (premature)
but still fully usable, like the early days of myspace

or risk being a copy but with a more developed product.

examples:::

www.zillow.com -real estate valuation company, not really an original idea,
but a lot of their data is way off and they are getting bad reviews for it. Don't get me wrong I think their site is great, but did they launch a few
months prematurely? They overhyped also.

www.google.com -we all know what this is, they weren't first to market, but they released a better product than others

and MySpace, I consider them first to market because they had features that no one else had, i also think they launched a product that would be modded as it went along depending on what the users wanted. (Not perfect so I would consider it premature)

All of these companies had a large financial bankroll at least 1m+ when they began suprisingly google had the least. I do not have a large financial bankroll.

If anything I posted is wrong please comment on it and I apologize in advance.

davep

[B-Morgan]

Sounds like you need some partners (entrepreneurs), to revise and revise again your service (by talking directly to potential clients), and also do the necessary research. There's a terrific book called "Entrepreneur America" by Rob Ryan that helped me in the start-up of my business. I used tons of the books tips and it was like my business bible for starting the business. Yours-Brian

[akula]

dave, great question

at the end of the day, you are trying to deal with uncertainty (to launch or not to launch)

from personal experience, here's some thoughts

launches are done in stages

if you get positive feedback from focus groups / research surveys - we use this as a signal that a prototype be commissioned and if beta tests prove positive - v2.0 is commissioned and investment is made in marketing

that's how we deal with uncertainty, and avoid making costly mistakes, whilst minimising chances of foregoing opportunity

do you have thoughts this matter?

p.s. as far as timing goes: the rule of thumb is; "what matters is not timing the market, but time in the market"

that's why being in the market with something is more important than being out of the market and waiting for everything

the point is also made by David Beisel of Masthead Ventures: http://www.genuinevc.com/archives/20...ually_does.htm

Market timing doesn't matter, your idea doesn't matter. It's a certainty that you're gonna get these things wrong no matter how hard you try to get them right (because you don't have the data to make right decisions, or the stochastic advantage to get lucky)

What matters is cashflow, because if you have cashflow, you can stay in the market long enough to walk into the right opportunity

It's like throwing the dice. You're wondering when is the right time to stop shaking the fist and release. The reality, however, is that it's the number of times you get to throw the dice which is more important than how or when you throw the dice.

[davep]

hi akula

first off i apologize for not getting back to you, i read and listened to your responses and took them to heart, but PM you later on on this matter

I guess i should post my opinion on this matter also like your suggestion
here is my plan right now:

(my decision right now is to launch prematurely, to be "first in market")
(my company is fully self financed)

1. I have the positive feedback from focus groups/research
(but really hard to tell since it can't be compared to anything)
2. Launch in Beta V1.0 with limited advertisements (early Nov)
from here on it really depends on the public and if my idea is as original
and helpful to a problem (aside from getting exposure/marketing)
3. If it's a medium response I have plans to partner up with a larger company
to get more financing or marketing advice.
4. But my goal is really to take this from startup to reality without a "big buddy" help -- I know you might not like this goal

Right now the site is in development. AHHH I'm at the mercy of programmers.
I am working on legal stuff and getting the marketing ready for Nov 1. But it is still a race to "first to market".

davep

[akula]

Great! Thanks for update. I'm looking forward to many more.

Let's make some progress in regards to my usefulness to you.

In my role as "chat buddy" I can't tell you what you should or should not be doing, or make judgements on whether what you're doing is right or wrong (because I have less information that you)

What I can do, and this is where you can benefit, is to highlight general risk factors relevant to your situation. Hopefully, the identification of which will help you do your job as a ceo. Your job as an executive is to manage shareholder resources to generate highest returns with minimal risk. It just so happens that (for now at least), you are the sole shareholder, but your job as a ceo remains the same.

Example: First Mover Advantage. Does FMA exist? Can an entrepreneur justify their investment in a startup based on FMA? Perhaps. Perhaps not. Here's a report on the subject: First-Mover Advantage for Internet Startups: Myth or Reality? (pdf). You can discuss this report with me to draw conclusions. That's an example of discussing risk factors.

The point: Dave, here's some sincere advice. It's based on science, not to mention experience (which is inferior to science because it's statistically insignificant). To do a good job as a ceo, try not to think of this job as you having to prove that what you have is a good idea.

The better (scientifically speaking) way is to think of your job as an inquiry. You're on a search to find an opportunity by testing several of your ideas against the reality of the market. Some of these tests may prove successful and you'll have a startup on your hands. Some will not, in which case it's best to apply another idea. But, above all (no matter what), if the discovery process is failing to show positive signs - try not to go against the grain by forcing any particular idea to materialise....I think the general term for this is "throwing good money after bad".

So yeah man, good luck with your voyage of discovery...I guess they don't call it venturing for nothing :-)

P.S. No, I definitely do not mind you takling your startup to reality without a "big buddy" help. You'd love to talk to Peter Ireland from http://www.antiventurecapital.com/. He's a cool guy.

Originally Posted by davep

hi akula

first off i apologize for not getting back to you, i read and listened to your responses and took them to heart, but PM you later on on this matter

I guess i should post my opinion on this matter also like your suggestion
here is my plan right now:

(my decision right now is to launch prematurely, to be "first in market")
(my company is fully self financed)

1. I have the positive feedback from focus groups/research
(but really hard to tell since it can't be compared to anything)
2. Launch in Beta V1.0 with limited advertisements (early Nov)
from here on it really depends on the public and if my idea is as original
and helpful to a problem (aside from getting exposure/marketing)
3. If it's a medium response I have plans to partner up with a larger company
to get more financing or marketing advice.
4. But my goal is really to take this from startup to reality without a "big buddy" help -- I know you might not like this goal

Right now the site is in development. AHHH I'm at the mercy of programmers.
I am working on legal stuff and getting the marketing ready for Nov 1. But it is still a race to "first to market".

davep

[Philthy]

Zillow really isn't that bad. It's not exactly accurate but many times gives you a ball park idea compared to a real appraisel.

[Sam Barona]

Hi Dave, like with everything, there are benefits and drawbacks to launching something no one else has. But, first of all, let me just say that it is my opinion that most First to Market launches are missmanaged, and as a concequence, this has muddled the assessment of the first mover advantage issue.

What are (in my view) the key drivers to be first on the market with a product/service?
1- It gives them the kudos (whether perceived or real) of being the Original item, making others followers, or also runners
2- If the market is ripe of problems just waiting for your solution then you could take advantage of "creaming" pricing strategies that allow you more attractive margins as there are no competitors to fight you on price
3- Well managed first movers also have the advantage of market experience, which allows them to iron out any technical/marketing/packaging/etc issues; thus, whilst the others are still deciding whether to launch or not, your company is already moving onto V2 of your product/service

THe key resistors for being first on the market I see as being:
1- Risk; being first on the market can expose you to bad publicity for launching a product full of bugs, technical faults, etc. Thus, running the risk of damaging your brand and then having to spend resources carrying out damage limitation programmes, as well as fixing bugs, etc.
2- Cost; being first on the market with a product or service is far more expensive than being third or fourth. this is due to the fact that it is NEW, and thus, your target audiences need to be educated about why they should be using it instead of what they use currently in its stead. This in itself also brings issues of time (as it takes a lot of this to educate the masses) and ROI, since your money is being spent on educating and not necessarily on the type of marketing that will bring you ready sales.
3- is a mixture of the points in 2. This can be taken as an opportunity by savvy firms that want you to spend your resources to educate the market, open doors to this type of technology, generate interest in the technology and then enter the market with their cheaper/slightly better alternative to a more ready to buy public.

many companies try to combat this by making early announcements of the soon to arrive technology ala microsoft/sony, thus taking advantage of the publicity equity that being first to market generates, as well as keeping the kudos of being the originator. THey then release exclusive versions of their technology in Beta form ala gmail, with this actually acting as a catalyst for future marketing activity and allowing you to iron out your bugs, etc.

I hope this helps

Sam

[The Stealthy One]

Moved to General Internet.