> When you make something useful for a market large enough to make a successful business out of, there is no mystery.
This statement is where a trope, meme, and axiom collide in a nuclear reaction. Sure there's no mystery, but you're describing the end state after you've already done all the analysis. Although you're also missing the 'profitability' metric, which is important.
make something useful for a market: How do you know what's useful? You've used the "saves time" metric a couple times here, but that isn't always enough. Bikes save time over walking, but people still walk. Cars save time over bikes, but people still bike. Ditch-digging machines are orders of magnitude faster than human ditch diggers, but people still dig ditches. Buying fast food saves time over cooking, but people still cook. Netflix is more efficient than cable and Redbox, but people still buy cable and rent from Redbox. Quickbooks is more efficient than paper bookkeeping, but legions of small businesses still use paper. The examples go on forever. You can't know if your product is useful unless it's fundamentally obvious (lightbulbs, toaster, eyeglasses, cups, dog food) and most products aren't this way. Most are incremental improvements on stuff we've owned or done forever. Is your product a significant enough increment? That's where validation comes in...
for a market large enough: The perpetual question. Total addressable market is not a simple thing to figure out. Surely you're familiar with the traditional startup pitch: If we could get just 1% of this billion-dollar market... It's a dream-killer, that one. And it's really only useful in context -- consider a theoretically perfect product like, say... perfect socks. They magically match whatever clothes/shoes you're wearing, automatically adjust thickness depending on your feet and shoes, wick moisture better than anything else, and never wear out. Addressable market: everyone who wears socks. Home run. But now say they cost $10,000/pair to manufacture. Total addressable market: like 500 people. From a home run to hit-by-pitch just like that. My point: TAM is important, and non-trivial to calculate for all but the simplest idea. Talking to customers helps figure out what segment of the market 1) wants your product and 2) will/can pay for your product.
to make a successful business out of: That means margin and profit. If your theoretical $300 sedan above cost $350 to manufacture, it doesn't matter how revolutionary your idea was. The LIFX bulb is a possible example of this. Can LIFX deliver on their product for $70/each? A lot of people are saying it's impossible. If it ends up costing them $100/bulb to make it exactly like their Kickstarter campaign says it will be, that business is not going to be a successful one. There are armadas of good products & services that went belly up because they cost too much to make compared to what people would pay.
"How do you know what's useful? You've used the "saves time" metric a couple times here, but that isn't always enough. Bikes save time over walking, but people still walk. Cars save time over bikes, but people still bike. Ditch-digging machines are orders of magnitude faster than human ditch diggers, but people still dig ditches. Buying fast food saves time over cooking, but people still cook. Netflix is more efficient than cable and Redbox, but people still buy cable and rent from Redbox. Quickbooks is more efficient than paper bookkeeping, but legions of small businesses still use paper. The examples go on forever. You can't know if your product is useful unless it's fundamentally obvious (lightbulbs, toaster, eyeglasses, cups, dog food) and most products aren't this way. Most are incremental improvements on stuff we've owned or done forever. Is your product a significant enough increment? That's where validation comes in..."
Yes, but every one of the products you mentioned is successful and has created billions of dollars of wealth. Markets, like people, are complex, and rarely satisfied by a single solution. This is great news for new businesses that are afraid of competitors.
But whatever you are attempting to sell has to be better on an important dimension by an order of magnitude. I agree that "better" can be subjective, but I do not believe that you are going to achieve success by switching from idea to idea, hoping to strike a chord with consumers. No successful innovations come about that way. You have to know what you are building and why. Marketing the product should be the easy part. Talking to customers to learn how to make those types of product innovations is a pointless endeavor. Let's stop pretending that it doesn't require some innate talents to build a compelling product. It is really hard and not many people can do it. Many people can learn to code and launch websites. This mismatch is why there are so many shitty products on the market that never make a profit.
This statement is where a trope, meme, and axiom collide in a nuclear reaction. Sure there's no mystery, but you're describing the end state after you've already done all the analysis. Although you're also missing the 'profitability' metric, which is important.
make something useful for a market: How do you know what's useful? You've used the "saves time" metric a couple times here, but that isn't always enough. Bikes save time over walking, but people still walk. Cars save time over bikes, but people still bike. Ditch-digging machines are orders of magnitude faster than human ditch diggers, but people still dig ditches. Buying fast food saves time over cooking, but people still cook. Netflix is more efficient than cable and Redbox, but people still buy cable and rent from Redbox. Quickbooks is more efficient than paper bookkeeping, but legions of small businesses still use paper. The examples go on forever. You can't know if your product is useful unless it's fundamentally obvious (lightbulbs, toaster, eyeglasses, cups, dog food) and most products aren't this way. Most are incremental improvements on stuff we've owned or done forever. Is your product a significant enough increment? That's where validation comes in...
for a market large enough: The perpetual question. Total addressable market is not a simple thing to figure out. Surely you're familiar with the traditional startup pitch: If we could get just 1% of this billion-dollar market... It's a dream-killer, that one. And it's really only useful in context -- consider a theoretically perfect product like, say... perfect socks. They magically match whatever clothes/shoes you're wearing, automatically adjust thickness depending on your feet and shoes, wick moisture better than anything else, and never wear out. Addressable market: everyone who wears socks. Home run. But now say they cost $10,000/pair to manufacture. Total addressable market: like 500 people. From a home run to hit-by-pitch just like that. My point: TAM is important, and non-trivial to calculate for all but the simplest idea. Talking to customers helps figure out what segment of the market 1) wants your product and 2) will/can pay for your product.
to make a successful business out of: That means margin and profit. If your theoretical $300 sedan above cost $350 to manufacture, it doesn't matter how revolutionary your idea was. The LIFX bulb is a possible example of this. Can LIFX deliver on their product for $70/each? A lot of people are saying it's impossible. If it ends up costing them $100/bulb to make it exactly like their Kickstarter campaign says it will be, that business is not going to be a successful one. There are armadas of good products & services that went belly up because they cost too much to make compared to what people would pay.