Dear Startups: stop begging investors and pitch your clients(blog.123ship.it)
blog.123ship.it
Dear Startups: stop begging investors and pitch your clients
http://blog.123ship.it/2013/03/dear-startups-stop-begging-investors_7.html
8 comments
I think you'd agree that any advice is completely universal. Selling preorders is a solution for most cases, but we of course can discuss the exceptions. If your selling process is different than "get money -> ship the product" than you will always encounter cashflow problems and maybe it isn't so wise to start such a project as a startup.
Because 123ship.it is a software blog, I think the post is intended in context of software development, not widget stamping.
Another article about stop thinking investment and do something that magically will work without the initial money inyection.
I think these articles are good motivators but they don't fit in the real world. Let me sumarize my view point:
1. You can develop your MVP at home with your buddies, yes, but maybe you need money to make something crucial that requieres some expert contracting to get it done. 2. You can make a web app, yes, but maybe you need money to get some important licences to operate in the real world. 3. You can launch your project with a pitch, but, it will take ages to reach profitability without proper advertising campaign.
I guess some startups became important businesses in less than a month without money inyection, but they're not the rule and, in most cases, they've managed to get important attention from the press.
I think these articles are good motivators but they don't fit in the real world. Let me sumarize my view point:
1. You can develop your MVP at home with your buddies, yes, but maybe you need money to make something crucial that requieres some expert contracting to get it done. 2. You can make a web app, yes, but maybe you need money to get some important licences to operate in the real world. 3. You can launch your project with a pitch, but, it will take ages to reach profitability without proper advertising campaign.
I guess some startups became important businesses in less than a month without money inyection, but they're not the rule and, in most cases, they've managed to get important attention from the press.
Yeah, sure - in most cases you can't develop your MVP without money (and in my opinion making it at home with buddies within months doesn't make any sense), but investors are not the only and optimal cash source. It doesn't cost you a lot to start selling your product and get paid by first customers. I started 3 companies like that - I sold the product first and after that started producing it. I think you rather create obstacles and excuses than try to overcome them ;)
Totally agreed. I'll simplify this even more - people need to pay bills.
I agree that business often need some kind of investment to help get started but it is not always the case.
It feels like the end game of any startup these days is to close a round of investment from a top-tier fund as if that creates a business in itself. That point is very much just the beginning and then the real work starts.
We need to get back to thinking of investment as an aid to building a sustainable business not the first step to a sale to {insert large tech firm here}
It feels like the end game of any startup these days is to close a round of investment from a top-tier fund as if that creates a business in itself. That point is very much just the beginning and then the real work starts.
We need to get back to thinking of investment as an aid to building a sustainable business not the first step to a sale to {insert large tech firm here}
It doesn't create business but it does get the founders a paycheck.
The more startup stuff I read the more I think a lot of founders are just in it to get investment and draw a salary from that while they around bloviating about the latest buzzwords rather than either building a business or getting a job.
The more startup stuff I read the more I think a lot of founders are just in it to get investment and draw a salary from that while they around bloviating about the latest buzzwords rather than either building a business or getting a job.
Heaven forbid we would actually have to get a job - imagine all the new buzzwords we would have to learn!
Agree++ - I'll simplify even more: you could buy a cheap startup at Wal Mart, but you want a good startup, right?
Pitching to a large client puts you at risk of becoming a contractor for that client. This is a dangerous trap if your goal is to sell a scalable product.
Exactly. Get some clients to pay for your product (or your soon-to-be product).
I am not ever again doing the mistake of developing something in my corner. I want to see the money!
Find market/fit before trying to grow.
I am not ever again doing the mistake of developing something in my corner. I want to see the money!
Find market/fit before trying to grow.
I share the same experiences, now I'm working using the methodology you described.
There is a difference between clients and customers. If I ran a startup I would prefer to have customers not clients.
You don't know how an idea will turn out until you build the mvp. The Only validation you should need is that you are building something to solve a pain you are having.
It's easy to go overboard seeking validation data for an idea, don't forget to trust your intuition, its often a more accurate source of data.
You don't know how an idea will turn out until you build the mvp. The Only validation you should need is that you are building something to solve a pain you are having.
It's easy to go overboard seeking validation data for an idea, don't forget to trust your intuition, its often a more accurate source of data.
Argh. Pitch TO your clients. TO your clients. English - use it right.
This is just wrong. Pitch when used as a verb can - and sometimes must - be used without "to" ("He pitched me a new startup idea" vs *"He pitched to me a new startup idea"). As a noun it does need "to".
He's correct in this context though, because it is ambiguous as written. It has a great many meanings, in fact: you could mean to take your clients and throw them at a high velocity. It could mean to take some of your clients and heave them into a pile. It could mean to throw your clients into a fermentation vessel. You might mean to suspend your clients by poles to make a temporary shelter out of them for your camping trip.
"Pitch" when used as a verb without "to" has many more possible meanings than when used with "to"—the "to" clarifies the subject-object relationship. Without "to," the the clients could either be the object or the subject, for example it could be the clients "being pitched to" (they are the object of the verb) or "being pitched" (where they are the subject). Adding "to" clarifies and locks down the meaning of the sentence, and a sentence without ambiguity is generally the better one.
Incidentally, adding "an idea" at the end ("Pitch your clients an idea") also clarifies the subject—the subject of the pitch is clearly the idea, since it comes after the object and that's just the ordering rule that English likes; you could also reverse them, but then you'd need the "to" again to clarify the relationship, eg: "Pitch an idea to your clients".
Thus, as it stands, "Pitch to your clients" is indeed the more correct and clear English sentence.
However, given English is not the writer's first language, he's doing extremely well and should be commended. English is an extremely difficult language with a myriad of special cases and nuances, and it takes many years of dedicated practice to master them. We can only be supportive and educational, and hopefully this was.
"Pitch" when used as a verb without "to" has many more possible meanings than when used with "to"—the "to" clarifies the subject-object relationship. Without "to," the the clients could either be the object or the subject, for example it could be the clients "being pitched to" (they are the object of the verb) or "being pitched" (where they are the subject). Adding "to" clarifies and locks down the meaning of the sentence, and a sentence without ambiguity is generally the better one.
Incidentally, adding "an idea" at the end ("Pitch your clients an idea") also clarifies the subject—the subject of the pitch is clearly the idea, since it comes after the object and that's just the ordering rule that English likes; you could also reverse them, but then you'd need the "to" again to clarify the relationship, eg: "Pitch an idea to your clients".
Thus, as it stands, "Pitch to your clients" is indeed the more correct and clear English sentence.
However, given English is not the writer's first language, he's doing extremely well and should be commended. English is an extremely difficult language with a myriad of special cases and nuances, and it takes many years of dedicated practice to master them. We can only be supportive and educational, and hopefully this was.
wow, what a comment :) thanks a lot for your understanding and very, very usefull feedback!
> "He pitched to me a new startup idea"
That only sounds unnatural because of ordering (which is a little like old-style English). Reordered, it reads just fine:
"He pitched a new startup idea to me"
The "pitch [object] to [party]" usage is the older/more established, I think, although recent (American) usage has somewhat shifted to "pitch [party]".
It's not a big deal either way. Maybe ivix is from the UK or somewhere with different usage.
That only sounds unnatural because of ordering (which is a little like old-style English). Reordered, it reads just fine:
"He pitched a new startup idea to me"
The "pitch [object] to [party]" usage is the older/more established, I think, although recent (American) usage has somewhat shifted to "pitch [party]".
It's not a big deal either way. Maybe ivix is from the UK or somewhere with different usage.
[deleted]
Dear Investors: stop pitching the startups you invested in
It is annoying, but it is also part of their job...at least if they are doing it right.
Additionally, you're assuming that every startup is also a saas startup. Most aren't, meaning they might have a thousands in lets say production molds and an order of 10000 units from retailers. They'll need the investment money to help them fulfill orders and grow.
Lastly for many other startups there are costs that exceed past general development. Security is a good example of one of these large costs especially if you're dealing with money or private data in any way. These additional necessary costs could be minor but for many startups they're large and unable to be paid for by the hopeful entrepreneur.