The general mindset of “do stuff, break things” instils the belief that as long as you’re creating things that seem to be right, you’re making progress.
On the other hand, being praised by the crowd makes one focus less on seeding the product (the corollary is that great praises will convert to usage as well). And we humans have a tendency to wait for others to initiate the discussion and not start fishing in a dry river!
The user and advertiser are today, often the same person, wearing different hats at different points on a platform. The user is the new advertiser because the user now has access to the same advertising infrastructure and can perform the same promotional actions that the advertiser did in the past.
Product creators still think of features because they try to deliver a certain functionality. Instead, a product should actually be visualized as an answer to a pain point. Users don’t use products because they need certain features.
Why would a user talk about your product? Often, it’s because your product is really cool and helped them do something that they would never have imagined possible. But users don’t want to be talking about your product all the time.
Finding product/market fit is an iterative process but bottom line is to establish key metrics that define product engagement and focus on those metrics relentlessly. Anything that doesn’t contribute to moving those metrics upward is not important before product/market fit.
While many of us are now laughing at the extent to which the movie has been copied, but to those who knew nothing about the original artwork (did you?), the movie still is a great piece of storytelling and proves a simple point that a well conceived products (i.e. sum) is greater than the sum of parts.
When there is a lot of uncertainty regarding the product, answering ‘why’ could (and I say, could) turn out to be a never-ending-loop. You might be looking for data that doesn’t exist, you could be looking for customers who are still asking for ‘better horses’.
Sad but true: Many Indian brands do not prefer being called Indian [maybe lessons for Indian startups?]
Here’s a fact: if given a choice, an Indian consumer will buy a foreign brand instead of a domestic one. At its most basic level, this preference is sparked by prejudices against an Indian brand name, even though there is no valid reason to justify this bias.
Facebook focused on Harvard, Foursquare focused on New York and StackOverflow focused on programmers. In fact, StackOverflow’s growth and moving on to the cooking category from the programming category is a great case study. Apparently, programmers love to cook a lot!