Heyzap (YC W09) launches: The forming of Heyzap and some lessons learnt(immadsnewworld.com)
immadsnewworld.com
Heyzap (YC W09) launches: The forming of Heyzap and some lessons learnt
http://www.immadsnewworld.com/2009/02/heyzap-launches-forming-of-heyzap-and.html
68 comments
I had to come up with 111 business ideas for Seth's alternative-mba program this week. The idea was both to make sure we weren't choosing the business we wanted to start just because it was the first good idea we came up with, and also to prove that ideas were worthless because we could come up with a million billion-dollar ideas. There are nine of us, and so that's 999 ideas between us. We are going to take the best of these ideas and publish them all online. Of the 150 or so ideas we publish online, I suspect that 145 or so will be done by someone within the next five years. It's not that uncommon, it's just that everyone tends to think of the same stuff at the same time. That's why hit movies come in pairs.
Makes me think of game design:
http://lostgarden.com/2005/08/why-you-should-share-your-game...
Anyone can design a fun game, but there is a huge gap between an idea and a finished product.
http://lostgarden.com/2005/08/why-you-should-share-your-game...
Anyone can design a fun game, but there is a huge gap between an idea and a finished product.
You can say that again!
We did a game as part of Startup Weekend and then decided to pursue it after. Hopefully it will go into beta this week, but holy smokes it turned out to be a lot more nuanced than I ever imagined.
Really fun code to write though.
We did a game as part of Startup Weekend and then decided to pursue it after. Hopefully it will go into beta this week, but holy smokes it turned out to be a lot more nuanced than I ever imagined.
Really fun code to write though.
Game programming is some of the most satisfying code you can write outside of coding up your own operating system.
It's real time, lots of subprocesses that you have to schedule properly to keep the game ticking along at a playable pace, all kinds of interaction between objects and if you're 'lucky' a good bit of math and 3d stuff.
It's real time, lots of subprocesses that you have to schedule properly to keep the game ticking along at a playable pace, all kinds of interaction between objects and if you're 'lucky' a good bit of math and 3d stuff.
OT: Is a subscription to Gamasutra worth it?
I have a subscription to Game Developer magazine. It's a typical industry magazine. Very heavy on the advertising and PR, with an occasional high quality article. They sometimes offer free subscriptions, and if you search around you might find a sign-up form. They make their money off advertising, and they seem to be more interested in increasing their readership than collecting subscription fees.
Hit movies come in pairs because the big studios try to leverage each others marketing budgets. You really think that nobody thought of an asteroid movie until Armageddon/Deep Impact?
You did that? Cool - I'd be interested in hearing about your experience - please consider blogging about it.
It's under NDA, so I can't do a day-by-day blog of everything that gets said. However, I'll certainly write something up toward the end of the experience.
We do have a public group blog though, which you can find here:
http://www.sixmonthmba.com/
We do have a public group blog though, which you can find here:
http://www.sixmonthmba.com/
Without knocking YC: if you really feel that this is a great idea, and you really feel that it is doable, then just go ahead and do it. (Sure, you now have 1 YC funded competitor. Eh, who cares. Competitors are God's way of telling you there is a market which will pay to be satisfied. If you don't see any you should be scared. You can both still be successful.)
I'm sure Graham & co are on the level (I've never met him/them), but I was warned that there are vc who are scum. The advice I received was to document everything. Make sure you document who is at any meeting, and what info is passed along. Keep careful track.
Keeping careful track of who you tell what does not sell widgets to customers.
Sorry, I don't get your point. Do you mind elaborating?
The expected value of extra documentation for a possible lawsuit is lower than the expected return on just carrying out the business plan with the same resources. That is, it's almost certainly a waste of time.
Absolutely not. In fact, it is standard practice in most laboratories to have a research notebook that documents such things for patent purposes. This is relatively easy to do, and isn't much bother at all.
What do you use that documentation for?
If you need to go to court, they become legal documents showing you had the idea, and whom you told, and when. VC won't sign NDAs, so this is your best protection.
At the least, it can stop ugly boards (think: Blackboard) from coming after you once they gain traction ('cuz they got the VC funding, remember?).
At the least, it can stop ugly boards (think: Blackboard) from coming after you once they gain traction ('cuz they got the VC funding, remember?).
I've never heard of a single case where a startup made a claim against anyone based on such information. Nor is it necessary to protect oneself; commit logs should be fine for that.
The advice I got didn't only apply to startups. But, hey, you would know a lot more about this than I.
commit logs should be fine for that
You have commit logs for business plans? You're a good man.
commit logs should be fine for that
You have commit logs for business plans? You're a good man.
Mr. Graham, do you take requests for essays? You've been on both sides of the table on this. What would you honestly tell your younger self about protecting your work from "bad guys?" What is worth worrying about, and what is not, in your estimation? That would be very cool.
We don't have to go back to my younger self: I constantly have to advise YC startups about this.
What I tell them is short enough to put here. The only effective protection is secrecy. But you never want to seem overtly secretive. So the optimal policy is to seem to be explaining everything about what you're doing, but to omit the important but non-obvious details that you get right but someone trying to reproduce your project would initially get wrong. By definition, no one who's not an expert will notice when such details are omitted.
Part 2: Err on the side of openness. Your valuable secrets are not as valuable as you think, and the danger of telling people stuff is not as great as you think.
What I tell them is short enough to put here. The only effective protection is secrecy. But you never want to seem overtly secretive. So the optimal policy is to seem to be explaining everything about what you're doing, but to omit the important but non-obvious details that you get right but someone trying to reproduce your project would initially get wrong. By definition, no one who's not an expert will notice when such details are omitted.
Part 2: Err on the side of openness. Your valuable secrets are not as valuable as you think, and the danger of telling people stuff is not as great as you think.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who will thank you for posting that. It makes good sense.
Hmm. At the time we talked to PG about the idea and got funding it was a different variant in the same space. I am pretty sure we didn't tell PG about the current idea until after the other applications were decided.
I don't think you can read too much into Heyzap launching. Glad you like the idea though. Would love to hear your ideas on it if you would like to share.
I don't think you can read too much into Heyzap launching. Glad you like the idea though. Would love to hear your ideas on it if you would like to share.
Dude, you have to still go for it. YC isn't the "end all be all" of success. Yes, it does suck that you see your idea being implemented by somebody else and that they are getting the spotlight. But on the flip-side, this merely enforces the fact that you are thinking in the right direction. I would also keep an eye on Heyzap to see how successful they become, because that shines a clear light on the potential of what could be for you.
I would also encourage you to look at all the other startups that succeeded after others proved the concept before them...
iFilm vs. YouTube
Snapshot vs. flickr
Friendster vs. Facebook
(anybody else feel free to add to this list please)
Plow ahead...if you truly believe it's a great idea, then make it so but in your own way.
I would also encourage you to look at all the other startups that succeeded after others proved the concept before them...
iFilm vs. YouTube
Snapshot vs. flickr
Friendster vs. Facebook
(anybody else feel free to add to this list please)
Plow ahead...if you truly believe it's a great idea, then make it so but in your own way.
alta vista vs google
Thanks for all the replies and feedback and sorry for replying so late - I'm currently travelling through south east asia and don't have internet most times. That's the reason I haven't been working on my own startup as well. Last fall for me it was "maybe get chosen by yc and start working on the thing than or do a 6 month sabbatical first (after 3 years working for the man) and than start on my own.
So right now I think it will probably be 2starting on my own but working on something else2 :(
I completely agree with everybody that stated that the team is usually more important than the idea and that execution trumps everything.
Still the timing of the whole affair feels really bad to me. Having had this idea in mind for quite sometime (besides lots of others), finally quitting the job, submitting it to yc and now see it implemented by someone else from just that cycle where I was turned down I must say I kinda feel fucked - to be that blunt.
Everybody saying that I can still do it (or similar) is right in principle, but to me the most important part of yc has always not been about the funding money but the mentoring and networking and actually beeing in the valley. Coming from germany of course I can start here as well, but pg himself is the first to tell you about how much of a difference this is. So looking to go against an now established player with all those advantages on his side doesn't seem like that good of an option and the best my startup could achieve would probably be to be taken as "the lame german rip off" (there are a lot of them actually) by the public.
So in the end - not trying to read to much into it: the best conclusion I can come up with now is that apparently yc thinks that I and my team suck so much that, even when we come up with an idea like that, that is worth funding when someone else does it, we still stand no chance. So sadly I must say that I will probably not apply next time as I don't see how I could much improve on that situation.
BTW: Here is a part of my yc application so you can better understand where I'm coming from and judge for yourself.
What is your company going to make? Create a plattform to supply existing online networks with casual flash games which integrate into their social tree. Core business will not be in game development but in providing the service in form of customizable widgets to the social network site owners and users and ... Think "distributed kongregate"
For big plattforms like facebook and myspace that allow their users to integrate widgets of there own this means simply to create game widgets according to their api (i.e. facebook apps) and allow users to add those to their profiles. But unlike other simple games on facebook/myspace we want to make these games aware of the underlying social plattform by doing things like showing only the scores of the users friends in the high score table.
For smaller plattforms which don't allow user widgets (think NINQ and small self-developed local portals) we will market to the plattform owners to integrate a free full grown casual game portal in their site in form of a big widget which will occupy a whole page that they can then call THEIR game section. This big arcade widget will display games in different categories, most played games and most succesfull players - FOR THAT SOCIAL SITE ALONE.
...
Everybody saying that I can still do it (or similar) is right in principle, but to me the most important part of yc has always not been about the funding money but the mentoring and networking and actually beeing in the valley. Coming from germany of course I can start here as well, but pg himself is the first to tell you about how much of a difference this is. So looking to go against an now established player with all those advantages on his side doesn't seem like that good of an option and the best my startup could achieve would probably be to be taken as "the lame german rip off" (there are a lot of them actually) by the public.
So in the end - not trying to read to much into it: the best conclusion I can come up with now is that apparently yc thinks that I and my team suck so much that, even when we come up with an idea like that, that is worth funding when someone else does it, we still stand no chance. So sadly I must say that I will probably not apply next time as I don't see how I could much improve on that situation.
BTW: Here is a part of my yc application so you can better understand where I'm coming from and judge for yourself.
What is your company going to make? Create a plattform to supply existing online networks with casual flash games which integrate into their social tree. Core business will not be in game development but in providing the service in form of customizable widgets to the social network site owners and users and ... Think "distributed kongregate"
For big plattforms like facebook and myspace that allow their users to integrate widgets of there own this means simply to create game widgets according to their api (i.e. facebook apps) and allow users to add those to their profiles. But unlike other simple games on facebook/myspace we want to make these games aware of the underlying social plattform by doing things like showing only the scores of the users friends in the high score table.
For smaller plattforms which don't allow user widgets (think NINQ and small self-developed local portals) we will market to the plattform owners to integrate a free full grown casual game portal in their site in form of a big widget which will occupy a whole page that they can then call THEIR game section. This big arcade widget will display games in different categories, most played games and most succesfull players - FOR THAT SOCIAL SITE ALONE.
...
Anyway: yc is a great thing and I am thankful just for being able to watch it grow and congratulate everybody who makes it in. So no harm intended.
An angel investor that I talked to a few weeks ago said it's not about the idea and gave the example of Ray Krok. How many people have had the idea of flipping burgers, sticking it between a bun and some lettuce? It's about the execution. Maybe you can STILL do it better than them. Learn from their mistakes. Above all, keep moving.
Teams gather around ideas, without the spark you have no fire.
Both are equally important, but I understand where you are coming from.
Yesterday I walked away from a startup that was created around my initial idea. Sucks to walk away from that but I couldnt trust the players at the table and eventually it would of gone south and I would of stressed my way into heart failure as a result.
Execute your own ideas if at all possible. The barriers to do so get easier and easier every day. Learn accounting, and get as many good biz mentors as possible. Soak it all up- and own your own creativity- because there are millions of people who cant create for #!@$ who are just waiting to pounce on your skinny and walk right out the door with it.
Both are equally important, but I understand where you are coming from.
Yesterday I walked away from a startup that was created around my initial idea. Sucks to walk away from that but I couldnt trust the players at the table and eventually it would of gone south and I would of stressed my way into heart failure as a result.
Execute your own ideas if at all possible. The barriers to do so get easier and easier every day. Learn accounting, and get as many good biz mentors as possible. Soak it all up- and own your own creativity- because there are millions of people who cant create for #!@$ who are just waiting to pounce on your skinny and walk right out the door with it.
Actually, that is a very good point. Probably, YC should at least tell you, that they have accepted a team with a similar idea. Of course, they might simply have no time to write that sort of personal reply to everyone, but I see no business reason to hide this information.
I guess many people around here would agree that ideas are a dime-a-dozen and often times change during execution. However, I completely understand that you're feeling bummed, I would be too...
And even though others are working on it, that doesn't mean you shouldn't! What is keeping you from going ahead as planned, even if it's without YC?
And even though others are working on it, that doesn't mean you shouldn't! What is keeping you from going ahead as planned, even if it's without YC?
It's not all about the idea, it's about the team.
I really think that it is about both. You can have a stellar team with a shitty idea and bomb big time, you can have a stellar idea and a shitty team and you'll do the same.
A stellar team, a good idea, proper timing and now you maybe have something.
A stellar team, a good idea, proper timing and now you maybe have something.
A great team can sometimes recognize a bad idea early enough and replace it with a better one. I've seen that happen. Good ideas have a lot less ability to replace bad teams. (Or rather, they can do that just fine, by letting the bad team fail while their competitors win.)
Well, everyone else here is beating around the bush and trying hard to be nice so I'll be the one to do you a favor and just straight up tell you. It's either A. that YC liked your idea, but didn't like you- instead liking both the idea AND the other people. Or B. YC didn't like your idea or you enough but really liked the other people. I hope that helps and good luck proving them wrong.
a large part of what investors invest in is the team. YC tends to do quite a few second investments, because they've already decided that they believe in the team. i would peg this investment as one of those -- that the idea was much less important in the decision than immad and jude forming the team was.
Ouch. Then the question this hypothesis brings to mind is, why didn't they have Immad and Jude build a different product?
Because YC isn't obliged to force teams to change the project ideas that they bring to the table based on any of the hundreds of applications they didn't accept?
I am going to put that down to the free thinking nature of Immad and Jude.
YC doesn't make anyone do any product, its the teams choice what they do.
YC doesn't make anyone do any product, its the teams choice what they do.
It is all about the team.
There are several companies currently executing on an idea I came up with (and thought was a brilliant, hundred million dollar idea) a year and a half ago.
But... My friends and I were comletely unprepared to execute. We learned this the hard way after months of hard work. Now those other companies have VC funding, tons of employees, etc.
If I could have done it, I'd be in their shoes.
Oh well. You live and you learn. It was an obvious idea in retrospect. I'll just come up with more.
There are several companies currently executing on an idea I came up with (and thought was a brilliant, hundred million dollar idea) a year and a half ago.
But... My friends and I were comletely unprepared to execute. We learned this the hard way after months of hard work. Now those other companies have VC funding, tons of employees, etc.
If I could have done it, I'd be in their shoes.
Oh well. You live and you learn. It was an obvious idea in retrospect. I'll just come up with more.
(Point being, just to clarify, we didn't have the skills, experience, wisdom, etc. to pull it off. And that's okay. You have to start somewhere... we just tried to start in the wrong place.)
VCs are looking more for people that are worth investing in rather than ideas. Good people can execute on any idea. Sorry to be blunt.
So, as far as I can understand, Y Combinator chose to support other guys working on an idea that is exactly the same as yours? I can see two useful lessons to learn:
1. So, those guys already launched with your idea? And you really think that their execution is perfect? Think twice. Yes, "YouTube for games" would be nice in theory, but to tell you the truth I don't want to play it, and I'm sure there are quite a few people like me in this respect. Something is not there that would make me enjoy this. But I like watching videos on YouTube, go figure. You can think hard about the deficiencies that prevent Heyzap from being enjoyable (yes, I hereby state that it is not enjoyable) and do this idea, the right way.
2. What made Y Combinator choose them over you? Even given the obvious deficiencies you realised in pt. 1? In your place, I would ask PG nicely to tell why you didn't make it and the other guys did.
1. So, those guys already launched with your idea? And you really think that their execution is perfect? Think twice. Yes, "YouTube for games" would be nice in theory, but to tell you the truth I don't want to play it, and I'm sure there are quite a few people like me in this respect. Something is not there that would make me enjoy this. But I like watching videos on YouTube, go figure. You can think hard about the deficiencies that prevent Heyzap from being enjoyable (yes, I hereby state that it is not enjoyable) and do this idea, the right way.
2. What made Y Combinator choose them over you? Even given the obvious deficiencies you realised in pt. 1? In your place, I would ask PG nicely to tell why you didn't make it and the other guys did.
The thing with starting a startup is that VCs look for trust. It doesn't matter if they like your idea or not, if they don't trust you, you aren't going to get your hands on their pot of money. Perhaps YC just felt that you couldn't pull it off that well, and then when the next team came along with apparently the same model, they felt the opposite this time around.
You could also be dealing with a case of having an idea that's too early for its time. Look at how much of a hard time Google had getting angel investors. If you feel that you have a solid idea, do it anyways. If it's as solid as you think it is, and you pull it off well enough, they'll come knocking on your door later on down the line.
Creating a startup is all about taking risks, and if you aren't willing to take a risk then don't travel down that path.
You could also be dealing with a case of having an idea that's too early for its time. Look at how much of a hard time Google had getting angel investors. If you feel that you have a solid idea, do it anyways. If it's as solid as you think it is, and you pull it off well enough, they'll come knocking on your door later on down the line.
Creating a startup is all about taking risks, and if you aren't willing to take a risk then don't travel down that path.
I don't know your idea, but I think "simultaneous invention" is quite common. Smart people looking at the same data and same context frequently reach similar conclusions.
In my experience, I've found this is a more common explanation for your situation than outright maliciousness.
In my experience, I've found this is a more common explanation for your situation than outright maliciousness.
VCs do this sort of thing all the time. But, maybe YC didn't do it intentionally. Maybe someone overhead your idea at a party. Maybe it was a coincidence.
Who cares? Get over it. Do it anyway. If you can't do it better, do it cheaper with less effort to starve 'em, or go somewhere they're not looking. Why are you giving up so easy?
Who cares? Get over it. Do it anyway. If you can't do it better, do it cheaper with less effort to starve 'em, or go somewhere they're not looking. Why are you giving up so easy?
what if the people with similar ideas were told about each other so that they might collaborate. the startup i founded with my husband is very community based, and we try to make use of everyone who is interested in contributing. on the tech side i work hard to keep a well document code base and interesting modules with minimal ramp up.
we've contacted every organization we hear about (more than 50; maybe more than 100) to talk about collaboration and partnering. it's not just about sharing resources like fund-raising or development, sometimes just sharing data, or strategically working on different things is useful. almost no one wants to do this. that kind of closedness is a shame. we've been working with a UK group and Finnish group for a while now, which has been going great.
we've contacted every organization we hear about (more than 50; maybe more than 100) to talk about collaboration and partnering. it's not just about sharing resources like fund-raising or development, sometimes just sharing data, or strategically working on different things is useful. almost no one wants to do this. that kind of closedness is a shame. we've been working with a UK group and Finnish group for a while now, which has been going great.
I think you're on point, here. We should take advantage of overlapping interests and resources.
I bet is not about the money he might not be getting, but the fact he wont build the product.
The more you give, the more you receive.
By the way, I'd like to know more about what you're doing.
[deleted]
I hate to say it -- the idea is the easy thing.
Execution is what really counts!
YC is not the end-all be-all. Great organization doing great things, but you could have done whatever it was you were going to do without their validation.
Maybe you really weren't all that convinced of your own idea (doesn't sound like it). Maybe YC did you a favor.
Maybe you really weren't all that convinced of your own idea (doesn't sound like it). Maybe YC did you a favor.
"yc chose somebody else (who had already in the program before) to create a business" I have to admit this part leave a bit uneasy from now on I will have to think twice before ...
That sucks, but that's life.
Give yourself 48 hours to feel bad about this, and think about why you are feeling bad about this... and then move onto the next thing.
Rejection is part of business, and having the competition scoop you is part of rejection.
Give yourself 48 hours to feel bad about this, and think about why you are feeling bad about this... and then move onto the next thing.
Rejection is part of business, and having the competition scoop you is part of rejection.
OMG! I totally had this idea, too!
Out of curiosity, how did your leaving your co-founder(s?) at Clickpass effect Clickpass's acquisition? At first blush, seems like harsh timing.
Going to go pedantic on you, but I believe you mean 'affect' and not 'effect'. I used to always have a have time with this until my doctoral supervisor told me to remember the mnemonic RAVEN: Remember Affect Verb Effect Noun. So 'to affect' is the verb and 'an effect' is the noun.
Of course, English being what it is there's an exception or two! Effect can be a verb when used in the form 'to effect a change'. And affect is from time to time a noun when used by psychologists.
But mostly RAVEN applies.
Of course, English being what it is there's an exception or two! Effect can be a verb when used in the form 'to effect a change'. And affect is from time to time a noun when used by psychologists.
But mostly RAVEN applies.
Hi Tony,
Given that I had made my decision the timing was going to be harsh whenever it was.
Acquisition from start to finish can be quite time consuming, so I could have been +/- 2 months and the timing would have been equivalently good/bad.
Hard to say effect, nothing is confirmed till the money is in the bank :). Me leaving definitely changed the outcome. Happy it still went through; all parties are happy and Clickpass found a good home.
Given that I had made my decision the timing was going to be harsh whenever it was.
Acquisition from start to finish can be quite time consuming, so I could have been +/- 2 months and the timing would have been equivalently good/bad.
Hard to say effect, nothing is confirmed till the money is in the bank :). Me leaving definitely changed the outcome. Happy it still went through; all parties are happy and Clickpass found a good home.
Whats with the 'adverts'?
"You have 1 challenge request [approve] [deny] [view friends]"
Then I (foolishly) believe it, and click on it, and it directs to (null) (from http://partners.tattomedia.com/sw/42/CD1/&dp=725 ) - Broken redirect...
:/
Something odd going on there (Tried playing Bloons on safari/firefox).
Some very addictive games there :)
"You have 1 challenge request [approve] [deny] [view friends]"
Then I (foolishly) believe it, and click on it, and it directs to (null) (from http://partners.tattomedia.com/sw/42/CD1/&dp=725 ) - Broken redirect...
:/
Something odd going on there (Tried playing Bloons on safari/firefox).
Some very addictive games there :)
Ads are currently served by mochimedia. We will complain! Thanks for the feedback.
Congrats Immad and Jude -- I knew you guys were on to something when I tried it and ended up spending a few hours playing an RPG game just totally randomly.
Thanks! Was it monster's Den? That game is pretty addictive...
Any sites have this loaded so I can try the games out?
I could do it myself, sure, but I don't think my (current) sites are exactly a fit.
I could do it myself, sure, but I don't think my (current) sites are exactly a fit.
http://www.heyzap.com/embed goes straight to the widget. Or you can try it on this site: http://www.dhingana.com/games
You can test them out on heyzap.com in both the publisher section and on the main home page. Cheers
congrats on launch! sounds like things are going really well!
Of course the idea for such a thing will always be born in many heads at the same time so it was probably just choosing the better team - and this happens probably a lot of times. And of course if you believe in a thing you don't need someone like yc to approve it when you can just go out and build it on your own. Still I feel kind of bad right now. I don't want to blame anybody of misbehavour or s.th., but it would have been nice to at least get a rejection mail that says s.th. like "We already have another team for a similar product" so you don't end up like me wondering about the timing of things later.
Anyway all the best of luck with this thing - I truly believe it's a great idea.