But it’s a good reminder:
🍋 If you have a lemonade stand, it’s better to go somewhere hot, where there are a lot of thirsty people.
💻 If you want to make software, it’s better to go where there are a bunch of potential customers.
Yesterday, I wrote about how easy it is to sell ice cream on a crowded beach: https://t.co/a9z2ZTixb7
Today, I’m at the local fair.
There are hundreds of vendors.
But there are also huge crowds who are hot and thirsty; lots of demand for cold drinks!
Go where the crowds are!
But it’s a good reminder:
🍋 If you have a lemonade stand, it’s better to go somewhere hot, where there are a lot of thirsty people.
💻 If you want to make software, it’s better to go where there are a bunch of potential customers.
There are a TON of factors that influence a business’ success (or failure).
But choosing a market that has a lot of demand (and good channels) is essential for future success.
You might be in a good market today, but tomorrow it could fall apart.
Markets are fickle.
Some days they want 🍦, other days they want 🥤.
The economy can go up, or it can crash.
A good competitor can come in and grab market share.
“Business is already hard, why make it harder?” – @asmartbear
Why try to enter a niche where there’s no demonstrable demand?
Why try to serve a total addressable market of 500, when you could go after 500,000 potential customers?
More from Startups
You May Also Like
The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
The story doesn\u2019t say you were told not to... it says you did so without approval and they tried to obfuscate what you found. Is that true?
— Sarah Frier (@sarahfrier) November 15, 2018
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
