Startups say the darndest things(agevik.se)
agevik.se
Startups say the darndest things
http://agevik.se/post/12932930667/startups-say-the-darndest-things-a-translation-cheat
15 comments
This seems to be the new trend on HN job posts: "we're xyz ycomb company. we're solving extremely difficult technical problems! [end]" ...yes, routing all those lunch orders must be a real pain...
Yeah this is driving me nuts. It feels like a lot of companies are throwing around the same catchphrases, when instead they should be describing what they actually do or need done.
One catch phrase that seems to be on decline is rock star.
"Pre-revenue" seems like such a ridiculous term. It should only be used post-revenue to describe the period of time...pre-revenue.
Unless, of course, that every startup founder is a pre-billionaire. ;P
Unless, of course, that every startup founder is a pre-billionaire. ;P
That's just standard corporate-speak. Take anything negative and give it a positive spin. We don't lose money, we're pre-profitable. ;)
...looking for a pre-fired software engineer
While not mentioned in the article, one annoying phrase that has emerged recently is "X for Y". "An AirBnB for music." "A Yelp for wedding dresses."
To me this speaks: "We aren't able to clearly explain what we do, but here's this other well-known company that solves a similar problem in a different market. We'll piggy-back from the recognition of their name. Look at us, look at them, and try to make a connection."
To me this speaks: "We aren't able to clearly explain what we do, but here's this other well-known company that solves a similar problem in a different market. We'll piggy-back from the recognition of their name. Look at us, look at them, and try to make a connection."
Cheap shot. You can't win with this one. You know what would happen if they described the product in a vacuum? The top comment on the HN thread would be "Basically, it's like an X for Y."
If somebody correctly makes a connection from your explanation to something they are familiar with, you have done your job.
If you need to make a connection with something you hope someone is familiar with in order to explain your product, you don't understand your product well enough.
If you need to make a connection with something you hope someone is familiar with in order to explain your product, you don't understand your product well enough.
Do you think it's important to differentiate your product in such a way that it can't be described as X for Y? I suppose there are arguments for either case.
If you can be described as X for Y, then you can make the argument that "it worked for the Z industry".
However if you can't be easily summed up as X for Y, you can claim that this is something completely new that's never been done before. And people like that...I think? I don't know, I'm rather new to this. What do you think?
If you can be described as X for Y, then you can make the argument that "it worked for the Z industry".
However if you can't be easily summed up as X for Y, you can claim that this is something completely new that's never been done before. And people like that...I think? I don't know, I'm rather new to this. What do you think?
I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you are trying to ask. Can you re-phrase your question a little?
The question I'm really trying to get at is whether it's good or bad to be an X for Y company, or at least for people to think of you that way.
Ah, good point.
I guess, but ideally, you can describe yourself with actual verbs, and leave the pat generalizations to HN commenters.
I disagree. The formula "We're X for Y" is a very succinct way to start painting a picture of what your company does. It's supposed to be a "hook" for an investor or a tech news writer (or reader) to keep listening to you. So I wouldn't assume they aren't able to clearly explain what they do.
Still, your complaint might be that, even if works for investors or tech news writers, it shouldn't necessarily be used for prospective employees. In that case, I agree. But I'm sure that, if you happened to be interested in a particular startup that used that formula to describe themselves, they'd be happy to provide you with more details on what they do.
Still, your complaint might be that, even if works for investors or tech news writers, it shouldn't necessarily be used for prospective employees. In that case, I agree. But I'm sure that, if you happened to be interested in a particular startup that used that formula to describe themselves, they'd be happy to provide you with more details on what they do.
Haha, I agree. I've never understood why defining your company in relation to another company makes sense. If you have a good business idea your company should be able to stand by itself.
You answered your own question.
If you don't have a good business idea (or if yours is underdeveloped) you try to create a connection with something a person might already feel positive about.
If you don't have a good business idea (or if yours is underdeveloped) you try to create a connection with something a person might already feel positive about.
Perhaps, startups have been reading Hacker News/Y-combinator too much? ;-) (http://ycombinator.com/howtoapply.html). Y-combinator applicants are encouraged to make such associations to enable the evaluators to quickly grasp what they are doing.
More like re-emerged. Remember "Napster for X"?
I love this sketch. I'll never get over Devil's Deuce Interactive. On a related note, I just found this:
http://www.angeldump.com/
http://www.angeldump.com/
I wish I could up-vote this multiple times.
this is sadly extremely accurate
the disruptive part especially
There is so much noise out there that mediocre companies manage to position themselves as the best of the best, or at least manage to make the best companies look foolish at this point.
The problem is that it's a lot easier to imitate the talking points of successful startup than it is to actually imitate the success.
The problem is that it's a lot easier to imitate the talking points of successful startup than it is to actually imitate the success.
Funneh. Particularly enjoyed “We’ve got great backing" as =
"We managed to convince VCs to give us money but we haven’t convinced any actual customers to do so".
"We've got early traction" = Our investors has made sure their other portfolio companies use our product.
Would you rather work for a company where the investors can't even convince their portfolio companies to use the product? Sure I get the humor. Maybe a solution would be to actually name one of the (hopefully big/famous) companies that use the product, instead of being vague. "Some great places have employed our solution! But we can't reveal any of their names!" Um. Yeah.
Would you rather work for a company where the investors can't even convince their portfolio companies to use the product? Sure I get the humor. Maybe a solution would be to actually name one of the (hopefully big/famous) companies that use the product, instead of being vague. "Some great places have employed our solution! But we can't reveal any of their names!" Um. Yeah.
I think the point is that the hardest, yet most important sell is a paying customer.
There are a number of ways to convince an investor to use a freebee. They aren't losing anything they haven't already lost when they gave you money.
A customer will not (well, most at least) pay for a product that offers nothing in return.
There are a number of ways to convince an investor to use a freebee. They aren't losing anything they haven't already lost when they gave you money.
A customer will not (well, most at least) pay for a product that offers nothing in return.
The "You will get a chance to shape the product" translation is way too funny. Definitely gives a different perspective.
ROFL "You will NEED to shape the product since we don't know what we are doing."
See Mule's http://unsuck-it.com/ for more.
They'd be better off prefacing each statement with "We wish ..." as it would sound a lot more sincere.
To be honest, the descriptions that stand out most to me are "we have X problem within Y context and we need a solution that will solve Z for us. Can you focus on it exclusively for six months?" Those usually turn out to be the most interesting problems to work on and will probably not attract people who are just interested because of the company is in a particular industry segment or focusing on a certain technology.
Work hard, play hard? You're probably doing neither and your holiday parties suck.
edited: "not attract"
To be honest, the descriptions that stand out most to me are "we have X problem within Y context and we need a solution that will solve Z for us. Can you focus on it exclusively for six months?" Those usually turn out to be the most interesting problems to work on and will probably not attract people who are just interested because of the company is in a particular industry segment or focusing on a certain technology.
Work hard, play hard? You're probably doing neither and your holiday parties suck.
edited: "not attract"
A job post needs to tell me what problem you're trying to solve by hiring and why I should care about your problem. The overwhelming majority of job posts completely fail to outline a clear value proposition.
I agree with this. I already had a few of these buzzwords on my list for job postings to avoid.
"Work hard play hard" - Yep, the author's right
"Significant Equity" - I guess I've read too much HN to know that that's nothing
"Pre-revenue" - Entirely too much risk to leave your current job to go to; maybe if you were between jobs.
The last thing I avoid is the list of perks that make it seem like your life is work. Sure, perks are nice, but not so I can all my time there. I got a tour of Palantir, and I'm like "This is really sweet." Then I got to their nap time room, where you can sleep for a bit when you're pulling an all nighter. I drew the line there because the way it was positioned was too strongly implying you must spend all your waking hours at work, and then some.
"Work hard play hard" - Yep, the author's right
"Significant Equity" - I guess I've read too much HN to know that that's nothing
"Pre-revenue" - Entirely too much risk to leave your current job to go to; maybe if you were between jobs.
The last thing I avoid is the list of perks that make it seem like your life is work. Sure, perks are nice, but not so I can all my time there. I got a tour of Palantir, and I'm like "This is really sweet." Then I got to their nap time room, where you can sleep for a bit when you're pulling an all nighter. I drew the line there because the way it was positioned was too strongly implying you must spend all your waking hours at work, and then some.
I'm trying to solve my voodoo value problem and by hiring you I can massage my pre-money numbers and get a tax break for R&D. Want the job?
"All-star technical team" = "Each developer will tell you the others are stars. Perspectives from outside the circle might differ."
Definitely funny, entertaining, and there's a case to be made that its true a lot of times.
I don't know how to feel about it though. On the one hand I'm hoping it was a joke and nothing more as there are some good apples out there but then I also remember that there are a bazillion little startups that are just either clueless, incompetent, or decent but overhyped and overfunded.
I don't know how to feel about it though. On the one hand I'm hoping it was a joke and nothing more as there are some good apples out there but then I also remember that there are a bazillion little startups that are just either clueless, incompetent, or decent but overhyped and overfunded.
Don't forget decent but obscure.
Since when are such cynical attempts at humour posted on hn? Best not to read something like this if you want to stay motivated enough to do the work required to get "post-revenue" whatever that means.