Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
If only someone told me this before my first startup
207 points by johnrushx on Dec 24, 2023 | hide | past | favorite | 82 comments
1. Validate idea first. I wasted at least 5 years building stuff nobody needed.

2. Kill your EGO. It's not about me, but the user. I must want what the user wants, not what I want.

3. Don't chaise investors, chase users, and then investors will be chasing you.

4. Never hire managers. Only hire doers until PMF.

5. Landing page is the least important thing in a startup.

6. Hire only fullstack devs. There is nothing less productive in this world than a team of developers.

7. Chase global market from day 1. You'll win or fail despite the market you target in most cases, so go for bigger upside.

8. Do SEO from day 2. As early as you can. I ignored this for 14 years. It's my biggest regret.

9. Sell features, before building them. Ask existing users if they want this feature. I run DMs with 10-20 users every day, where I chat about all my ideas and features I wanna add.

10. Hire only people you would wanna hug. My mentor said this to me in 2015. And it was a big shift. I realized that if I don't wanna hug the person, it means I dislike them. Even if I can't say why, but that's the fact. Sooner or later, we would have a conflict and eventually break up.

11. Invest all money into your startups and friends. Not crypt0, not stockmarket, not properties. I did some math, if I kept investing all my money into all my friends’ startups, that would be about 70 investments. 3 of them turned into unicorns eventually. Since 2022, I have invested all my money into my products, friends, and network.

12. Post on Twitter daily. I started posting here in March this year. It's my primary source of new connections and traffic.

13. Don't work/partner with corporates. Corporations always seem like an amazing opportunity. They're big and rich, they promise huge stuff, millions of users, etc. But every single time none of this happens. Because you talk to a regular employees there. They waste your time, destroy focus, shift priorities.

14. Don't get ever distracted by hype, e.g. crypt0. I lost 1.5 years of my life this way. I met the worst people along the way. Fricks, scammers, thieves. Some of my close friends turned into thieves along the way, just because it was so common in that space.

15. Don't build consumer apps. Only b2b. Consumer apps are so hard, like a lottery. It's just 0.00001% who make it big. The rest don't. Even if I got many users, then there is a monetization challenge.

16. Don't hold on bad project for too long, max 1 year. Some projects just don't work. In most cases, it's either the idea that's so wrong that you can't even pivot it or it's a team that is good one by one but can't make it as a team.

17. Tech conferences are a waste of time. They cost money, take energy, and time and you never really meet anyone there. Most people there are the "good" employees of corporations who were sent there as a perk for being loyal to the corporation.

18. Scrum is a Scam. If I had a team that had to be nagged every morning with questions as if they were children in kindergarten, then things would eventually fail. The only good stuff I managed to do happened with people who were grownups and could manage their stuff. We would just do everything over chat as a sync on goals and plans.

19. Outsource nothing at all until PMF. In a startup, almost everything needs to be done in a slightly different way, more creative, and more integrated into the vision. When outsourcing, the external members get no love and no case for the product. It's just yet another assignment in their boring job.

20. Bootstrap. I spent way too much time raising money. I raised more than 10 times, preseed, seed, and series A. But each time it was a 3-9 month project, meetings every week, and lots of destruction. I could afford to bootstrap, but I still went the VC-funded way, I don't know why. To be honest, I didn't know bootstrapping was a thing I could do or anyone does.

That's it.




21: listen to other people's lists of rules and take them with a grain of salt


correct. my list isn't a piece of advice, it's just a list of my personal experiences, that the reader can interpret with their own judgment


> 3. Don't chase investors, chase users, and then investors will be chasing you.

> 9. Sell features, before building them. Ask existing users if they want this feature.

> 15. Don't build consumer apps. Only b2b. Consumer apps are so hard, like a lottery. It's just 0.00001% who make it big. The rest don't. Even if I got many users, then there is a monetization challenge.

^ these in particular stand out and all connect together. many plans never say who you will sell to, how to reach them, and how much they will pay. beware the urge to start working before these questions are answered

without thinking about, and talking to, customers, you can dwell safe + warm in your solitary brain for far too long


I'd say this is #1 error that I see around


in fairness the poster learned these things by dwelling in the 'build first' place and so did I

so is it an error? or a necessary phase of growth

but yes it is good to graduate beyond it


Exec at a B2B software company. Joined when it was 12 people with no money, customers, or product - Unicorn company today with same exec team.

1. Agree

2. Agree

3. Chasing VCs was required for us. I have been in 100s of VC meeting supporting our CEO through two companies and many rounds of funding.

4. Agree

5. Agree

6. Full stack devs preferred. The right UI and DB specialists are game changers though.

7. Agree

8. Invest in a marketing lead machine from day 1. e.g. Glengarry Glen Ross :)

9. Agree

10. I am not a hugger. I prefer to hire people who do not give up. Everyone wants to convince you what ever you are trying to achieve will not work. If you hire people who do not do well with failing, they will really struggle with a failing fast approach.

11. Cannot relate

12. Cannot relate

13. Big companies can be helpful. But, when you are small, the numbers you generate are round off errors in their financial reports. It is very hard to align a win/win situation that keeps them interested.

14. Cannot relate

15. Agree

16. Agree

17. Agree

18. Agree

19. Agree

20. I admire companies that have grown by bootstraping. Bootstrapped high growth companies are rare. You will most likely need funding to grow your idea - great talent is not cheap.

Add: You need both a developer and a sales person to start a software company. You have to build and sell software to stay alive. #9 is very true.

Ideally, you start selling before you build - definitely sell before the product is ready. This gives many developers anxiety. Do not underestimate how hard or how long the sales process is. The worst situation to be in is that you wait for the product to be ready before you try to sell it - this is death to a start up.


pretty good breakdown. I actually learned something from your reply


Good list but I don’t agree with all of them.

For example, post on Twitter everyday. It might have worked for some people before but I always found Twitter as noise and pointless. You can see startups getting likes for dump screenshots of revenue or milestones but it doesn’t really get you customers or real users.

The corporate one is spot on, I’ve had lots of interest from large companies but I couldn’t close any as I was a solo founder. They require lots of paper work, sales cycle is months, lots of stake holders … etc


try using "muted words" on twitter. I added 200 words and it's so good now. If you dont like "MRR" posts for exampple, you can mute them


The marketing focus and pitfalls of corporate "partnerships" and the destruction of momentum that comes from shifting focus to chasing VCs all resonate strongly.

If I could go back in time, I'd have put 100% of the energy I put into fits & starts around partnerships (that unanimously went nowhere useful) into more baseline marketing around awareness and discoverability. I'd also have gone about fundraising significantly differently.


yeah, one of my biggest regrets


> 5. Landing page is the least important thing in a startup.

> 8. Do SEO from day 2. As early as you can. I ignored this for 14 years. It's my biggest regret.

Those seem pretty directly in conflict. (I suspect that #5 is the one that's in error.)


in #5 I mean the design of LP. founders often put too much attention on design, logo, and pages.. Should put all attention into SEO parameters (research keywords and write the page copy accordingly)


This is a good list (except for 11, survivorship bias means that investing in startups is not as universally profitable as investing in VTI). All of these though have been covered extensively in lots of books over the years that I'd assume even a cursory search of "how to get started with entrepreneurship and startups" would uncover, like Lean Startup, Mom Test, etc, for those who don't want to learn the hard way as it seems you have.


I'm pretty sure there is survival bias in some of my points. Some I've replicated many times, so I'm pretty confident


Surely it depends on your investment goals and attitude to risk.


<

3. Don't chaise investors, chase users, and then investors will be chasing you.

4. Never hire managers. Only hire doers until PMF.

5. Landing page is the least important thing in a startup

>

My experience at multiple startups from 2017-2020 suggests differently. I wish it weren't the case, but it seems there is a certain type of company that can focus solely on hype and fundraising and headcount, and make it quite far.


That's not a company; that is a scam.


That used to be true in 2017-2020 for certain sectors of company and funding source; where did they raise funding from? And is that funding source no longer investing?

> and make it quite far

Is that measured by funding rounds and valuation, or by paid users/revenue?


Far as in longevity, propelled by funding rounds and valuation far out-pacing actual revenue.


you're right, there is this type. however, it's a very rare type. We see them often in the news, but it's less than 1% of the startups


I hope you're right, but I'm also shocked that I've managed to work for more than 1 already in my short career.


I find it insane that in many interviews of "founders" it was common for founders to say their job was to raise money.


A lot of companies, most notably Facebook, Uber, Doordash, and Amazon, took a ton of time to not lose absurd amounts of money, so I can see why that was the job. They literally had ideas that wouldn't have worked as companies without billions of dollars.


yes, true, but this is 0.001% of the startups, which won't happen to a typical founder


CEO’s job is to not let the company run out of money. One way to achieve that is through fundraising, but fundraising shouldn’t be a goal in itself.


That is part of the CEO's job. But the primary goal should be to create a company that is profitable (assuming incentives are correctly aligned). For the past decade incentives were not correctly aligned and the primary job was to do the Silicon Valley equivalent of flipping a house.


Nah for venture-backed it’s to deliver results for investors.


yeah, and this seems like a common thing, but the reality is that most startups are actually bootstrapped and never raised money and never even tried. But the media covers mostly VC funded startups and their stories, that's why it feels like this is a typical story, but it's just 1% of the reality


A lot of scammers everywhere in the investment world. I won’t deny that crypto has more than it would justify based on its industry size. But you will get eaten by sharks everywhere if you aren’t careful. Have good lawyers and protect your cap table, don’t let bad people on your board, be careful


> There is nothing less productive in this world than a team of developers

Ever met people with "brilliant ideas" but no skills to make them concrete? They're not only nonproductive, but usually sap everyone else's productivity with their "expertise."


oh yeah


Almost every point has a counter by a different startup. The lesson is why didn't that circumstance work for you, not that it doesn't work.


this angle suggests that no experience of other person can be useful, since it's a subjective experience. Yes, it's my subjective experience, I didn't say: "do as I did or follow my advice". I said: I wish I knew this from before and didn't make these mistakes. Why do I think these are mistakes? Because I did it one way, then another way and things got a lot better. It made me think that the old way was the problem in cases where I reproduced it multiple times.

However the reader should take everything in my post as my subjective experience which they should make up their own mind upon


(what is 'PMF' in this context...?)

Edit: Product/Market Fit. Got it.


This list is things i generally felt were true before hand but nice to see it be confirmed.

(sans the comment about real estate).


> There is nothing less productive in this world than a team of developers.

Senior dev chiming in here (44yo), mainly replying to some other comments here, that claim once your team is > 1 person, your overall productivity does not increase with a person every time.

I would say a good 2 person team is more productive than 2x 1 developer for the following reasons:

1. It's easier for 2 people to keep each other motivated than 1 person alone.

2. When you get stuck on something, or have a difficult problem, you sometimes lose a lot of time as a solo developer. Having a second expert to consult might save you tons of time.

3. Individual developers have their own preferences and expertise. I mainly divide developers in 2 groups: bottom-up and top-down developers. Bottom-up are interested in technology, math and everything close to the hardware. They don't like squishy stuff like users. Top-down developers love to crunch out features, and technology is just a means to an end. Having a team of one top-down and one bottom-up developer is ideal.

If you are still not convinced, let me ask you the following: Which is most productive? John Carmack for 1 year, John Romero for 1 year, or Carmack and Romero for 6 months?

If you talk full-stack, is your bottom-up developer really good at the user interface, and will the top-down develop get bored with the backend stuff?


"good 2 person team">"one person team". - yes. however finding even 1 good dev is really difficult. Finding 2 great devs is insanely difficult for an early stage startup with no money. I've tried. In an ideal world, ofc you are right. But in real world of startups. Most got no chance finding good developers and almost none got a tiny chance finding 2 good developers


> "good 2 person team">"one person team"

That is clearly not what I said.


"Ask existing users if they want this feature" is a bad idea because users are going to say "yes" to everything, especially in a B2B SaaS app. It means nothing.


There's some very obvious ways to prevent that. One way is "here's a list of ten candidate features we might prototype this week/month/quarter/release, but you can only pick one". Or ask users to rank them, and only pick the consensus #1-ranked. The ensuing dialog can be informative.


Have you never say "no, I don't care about it" when asked such a question? I say that a lot of times, and get that from users all the time too.

The thing is, you can't confuse a "yes" with the user actually wanting it. But there are plenty of ideas that everybody clearly do not want, and people will answer you a "no" if you ask.


Depends how you ask. If you ask people whether they would pay extra $ for a feature, they might be more hesitant.


Focus on Users Over Personal Preferences: Prioritize validating your idea and catering to user needs over personal ego or preferences.

User Traction Before Investor Attention: Concentrate on acquiring users first; investors will follow if your user base is strong.

Hiring Philosophy: Hire proactive, multifunctional team members (like full-stack developers) who align with your company culture and avoid hiring managers or people you don't connect with until reaching Product-Market Fit (PMF).

Market Strategy: Aim for the global market from the start and prioritize SEO early on to maximize reach and growth potential.

Feature Development and Feedback: Sell and discuss potential features with current users before development to ensure relevance and demand.

Investment Strategy: Reinvest profits into your startup and trusted networks rather than external investments like cryptocurrencies or stocks.

Online Presence and Networking: Maintain active social media engagement, especially on platforms like Twitter, for networking and traffic.

Avoiding External Distractions: Stay clear of partnerships with corporations and distractions like hype markets, as they often lead to time wastage and misaligned priorities.

Business Focus and Decision Making: Prefer B2B over consumer apps due to higher success rates and easier monetization, and don’t hesitate to abandon non-performing projects within a year.

Project Management and Outsourcing: Avoid methodologies like Scrum if they don't fit your team's style and refrain from outsourcing until achieving PMF to ensure alignment with your vision.

Funding and Time Management: Bootstrap your startup if possible, avoiding the time-consuming process of raising funds, and recognize that tech conferences may not always provide value.


good take


Doesn't 13 contradict 15?

Also, if I opened a startup and followed 10, I'd end up with a team of my wife and my dog. Which would be a wonderful company, but the revenue potential would be somewhat limited.

18 seems to me a fundamental misunderstanding how it should work. Or at least how it worked when I saw it working. It's not about managing or nagging, it's about sync Shelling point.

19 I haven't seen a single startup that could pull it off. I mean, doing their own accounting and HR and payroll management while bootstrapping? Or does it mean "outsource nothing of core product", not nothing in general? That'd make more sense, but in current componentized world, you'd be effectively "outsourcing" a lot of stuff anyway.


14. Don't get ever distracted by hype, e.g. crypt0. I lost 1.5 years of my life this way. Currently there is a lot of hype around LLM. Do people think, it will go the same way?. I understand we cannot compare. But usually we get carried away assuming its different this time.

(Btw very nice thread. Thanks)


yes, LLMs are dangerous. Many people got distracted. Not as bad as crypto, no scam there, but many founders are gonna waste time and regret. But the job of a founder is to be wise with time. If a founder isn't wise with time, the open market will kick them out of competition. That simple


>6. Hire only fullstack devs. There is nothing less productive in this world than a team of developers.

While I can agree that hiring full stacks may be better at the beginning, then I dont understand 2nd part "There is nothing less productive in this world than a team of developers."

WTF?


If shipping something requires a 'team' – coordination between specialists (or worse, multiple 'owners') – it'll be harder than when each cross-cutting feature can be done by a broadly-capable/empowered 'full stack' person.

(At least, that's how I interpret the OP, and don't understand your perception of any tension between 'full stackers best' & 'teams unproductive'.)


See the author's developers; raise him a faculty lounge full of academics.

Then defenestrate myself.


haha.


there is huge overhead when having more than one dev. most software is simple, and having one person building the whole things is actually very productive. There are lots of other potential issues, but I talk about startups in my post. Not about corporate software. Startups mostly have simple software products


Hey thanks for posting this. What’s a good way to learn about successful B2B companies? All my experience is in B2C and while I can imagine some B2B ideas, a concrete set of examples would help. Btw, I went to your website on your profile and saw some examples, but would like more. Also, the hamburger menu on your website was broke for me, iPhone 13 mini Firefox


> There is nothing less productive in this world than a team of developers.

First, yikes.

Also, I'm quite curious about how productivity was measured here.

For a (successful) software business, the work output of developers is highly productive because the marginal cost of selling another copy of the software is so low.

SaaS delivery models may result in somewhat higher marginal costs compared to non-SaaS distribution models, but I'd be surprised to learn that it makes developer work the least productive component of the SDLC.


They aren't saying developers are unproductive. They are saying teams of developers are unproductive. In the words of my great grandfather. "one boy is one boy, two boys is a half a boy, and 3 boys is no boy at all"


I don’t know. If someone told me “there is nothing less delicious in this world than your turkey casserole” and you came along and said “they aren’t saying your turkey casserole is undelicious,” I’d be inclined to believe you misheard something.


Team / interpersonal communication overhead, planning overhead, and dealing with less skilled members of the team can easily make 4 engineers roughly as productive as one very skilled engineer, just at 4-5x the cost once you include the increase in product/project management required by multiple people. We tolerate this generally because eg upskilling peers is important to scale a company, but pre-PMF it's a huge advantage to have just the one outstanding engineer.


yes. this is what I meant


the difference in productivity between 1 and 2-person teams isn't in 100%, but in maybe 50%. The more people you add, the smaller the productivity gain.

From my own experience, my most successful products have been built by one single full-stack dev. Who did everything


It may be true, but real skill lies in realizing the moment it stops being true which is inevitable with growth and act accordingly.


Oh geez I’m building an app for B2C: StickerDocs.com. I don’t necessarily want to go big with it but I sure as hell have point 5 on lockdown.


did you try testing the idea? pitching to friends, or creating a waitlist or buying ads?


Thank you for this.

> 5. Landing page is the least important thing in a startup.

Can you elaborate on this point? I think I understand the idea of spending too much time rewriting the copy or moving pixels on a landing page, but your way of putting it is much more extreme, so I'd be glad if you can tell a bit more about your point of view.


Bootstrapped a B2B SaaS co for 12 years and I'd agree with just about every single one of these, except maybe number 7.

North America is big, and EU regulations are a bear.

You can get huge in the US alone.

Going international means i18n, which is a helluva dev task that affects nobody in the North American market.


But why? Do you have any evidence that if you did these things you would be more successful? Why is this the list of things that matters? If I had the opposite perspective for every item on this list, what would be convincing that I should change my perspective?


these are not my thoughts or ideas we can debate. I simply listed facts from my past. I did this all and things got better. I ended up building 20 profitable businesees, so I replicated these rules many times.

Im open to consider alternatives, if someone brings real facts with proving results. If it's just the debate, I won't go into it. The whole internet is full of fantasies and debates. I live in a factbased world.


How much money did you make though?


enough to be financially independent and self-fund my startup to the rest of my life


Actually very good points. Thanks!


ur welcome


I agree with some if what you said.

I am not qualified to judge the rest.

It is very odd that I do not disagree with anything you said.


11. Invest all money into your startups and friends

12. Get better friends


It is so awesome! Thanks so much for sharing!


you're welcome


> 6. Hire only fullstack devs. There is nothing less productive in this world than a team of developers.

Huh? And those "fullstack devs" will do everything alone or what? Maybe if you are building a proof-of-concept prototype with a useful half-life of 6 months before you sell the company to someone else (and let them deal with the mess under the carpet) but not once you actually start selling the product - and mainly, have to maintain it.

I have spent 11 years in such startup - and this "fullstack" mentality, with everyone being "expert" in everything led to quick and dirty solutions that worked for getting a release out to the client - and repeatedly kept blowing up in our faces every few months afterwards.

"Fullstack developer" is myth. Yes, people can learn a little bit of everything to get a cobbled up solution out of the door. But this doesn't scale and will severely impact the quality of what you are delivering over time. At some point you will need to invest in specialists or let people specialize, especially if you are building anything beyond some trivial web apps. Ignore at your own peril ...

>18. Scrum is a Scam. If I had a team that had to be nagged every morning with questions as if they were children in kindergarten, then things would eventually fail. The only good stuff I managed to do happened with people who were grownups and could manage their stuff. We would just do everything over chat as a sync on goals and plans.

No offense, but that only means you don't understand Scrum and are cargo-culting it instead. Which is, unfortunately, common. People focus on the process minutiae and lose sight/don't understand why that process exists and what it wants to achieve. Then they declare that "Scrum is a scam" instead of adapting it to their needs, while keeping the spirit/idea behind it (i.e. not turning it into a waterfall/whatever).

There is nothing in Scrum that explicitly prescribes that one must have an in-person standup every morning - and that the same cannot be done over chat or some other means.

The point of these things is to have a daily sync point for all stakeholders. And that explicitly includes the usually very busy founders/partners if they are part of the development team (e.g. as product owner(s) ).

This is vital for the developers if they are to build what the business/customer actually wants because the PO needs to be there to answer questions - and also for the PO/business stakeholders to have an overview how things are going and what needs to be organized/fixed/resolved for the team to keep moving forward towards the objective.

Specifically, this is not intended for you to organize or manage the time of your team! You are there to only to set the goals (at the sprint planning usually) and to clear the way for the team as required e.g. by providing necessary resources which may come up during the sprint.

If you can make do without such formal structure only with chat - by all means do so. However, it does not scale and you will discover this rather quickly as your team(s) grow in size and scope - even with 3 people it is often too much already.

Unless your team is capable of reading minds you will sooner or later end up inundated with organizational questions over the day, which is both distracting and slows everyone down - the busy founder/owner/PO becomes a bottleneck.

We had this in the startup I was in. The owner was practically impossible to get hold of because he was constantly busy, important decisions only he could make were thus not being made, projects were being delayed because of this, etc.

At my current company we have Scrum implemented in the more-or-less original form, with 15 minutes long standups over Microsoft Teams (we are mostly remote) every morning so that everyone knows where we stand, what issues need to be solved and what are we going to be doing today.

Some teams have a longer technical follow-up afterwards for the developers (the PO and scrum master usually leave at that point) if required, others don't. However the meeting is an important point to get the daily "bureaucracy" out of the way so that the organizational distractions can be kept to the minimum during the day.


I don't disagree, because you're mostly talking about mature startups and corporations. My experinece comes from early stage startups and small saas companies. Where scrum and dev teams aren't helping and having just one dev doing the whole thing is actually very productive. But your points are good, if the reader is coming from a bigger company


That "mature startup" I was working at had no Scrum and 6 people, including the two founders.

The lack of some sort of formal structure very much was a problem.

Granted, some people are so self-disciplined and enlightened/experienced that they are fully capable of self-organizing and don't need the support of any formal work structure. But those are rare like hen teeth. It doesn't have to be Scrum but Scrum works, so why reinvent the wheel?

This is especially true at early stage startups when there are millions of things to take care of besides the coding. The structure/being organized is super important or things start falling through the cracks.

If it is a feature request that didn't make it that is annoying but likely no big deal. But if it is e.g. a tax declaration for the company or maybe some government paperwork that had to be done, or following up a major investment/sales lead - that could literally destroy your company overnight.

So having a structure in place to make sure everyone is constantly on the same page, everyone knows what needs to be done - and mainly who is going to do it - is super important.

The problem is that most people I have met didn't realize this. Esp. when the founders have never worked in a structured team themselves, never saw how to manage a team or had a mentor to show them the ropes. So you end up with poorly reinvented management "wheels" that don't work and the company is wasting precious capital because suddenly the founder becomes an over-stressed and overloaded bottleneck trying to juggle coding, finances, sales, filing taxes and what not. Or, worse, makes the company fail because something that had to be done wasn't.

This isn't stuff that is taught in universities or that people are somehow born with. One has to learn it with experience - and ideally see how to do it from someone more experienced.

Obviously, if your entire company is one person, you don't need Scrum. However, the moment you hire your first developer you better put some structure in place because sooner or later you will outgrow the informal "system". Only so much can be done with a single person.

And once you have more than 1 developer (or any team member - it can be graphic designer, web designer, sales, whatever) you will have problems if you keep things totally free form. It becomes super inefficient.


from my experience i find daily standups very helpful even for a small company. it obviously makes no sense if you only have a single developer working on a project, but as soon as there is more than one some coordination is necessary, and i find that standups are the least intrusive way to achieve that.


I need only 1 thing: Dedication.


You should be very lucky to have 3 friends with their startups turning into unicorns. For most of us, crypto/stock market investment has more gains though.


This. I would not invest a single dollar into my friends' businesses. I might consider it if I had an exceptional set of friends




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: