Why aiming to control your own destiny can be a superpower for founders ๐ช๐ฝ
An atomic essay on moonshots & escape velocity ๐
Escape velocity in physics is the speed an object needs to reach to escape the earth's gravitational pull, and take off into space.
Investors sometimes talk about a startup reaching escape velocity, which is the speed and milestones the team needs to reach before they can start accelerating.
Key components include having product/market fit and the right team members on board, finding a tenable business model, and enough cash to build.
Before acceleration = Survival
TBH you never know how long it will take (esp de-risking P/M fit) and so second-time founders may initially stay under the radar and first raise from friendly angels โ or moonlighting โ before raising institutional capital (that's us).
You never used to hear it, but Iโm thrilled now to hear many founders talk about โcontrolling their own destiny.โ This is getting to the point where they donโt need outside capital.
Founders who control their own destiny know that their core business works:
๐ฐ They can handle their finances
๐ฅ The team can build something customers want
๐ Customer acquisition costs are known
๐ They have reasonable (even attractive) profitability per customer transaction
These are important milestones.
Yes, we live in interesting funding times, but if youโre not building an audio social networking app ๐ *controlling your own destiny* can be important leverage to raise money.
Our best teams donโt NEED us for the basics of their businesses. Outside capital wants to help you *accelerate* ๐
Escape velocity is being able to survive in flight. Don't be afraid to walk -> run -> fly ๐
โข โข โข
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
An atomic essay on Clayton Christensen, getting specific and GOOD ENOUGH products ๐
Clayton Christensen, the brilliant HBS innovation thinker & professor, was hired to analyze and improve fast food milkshakes ๐ฅค
At the time, the company didnโt know why the milkshakes were popular with consumers ๐โฃ๏ธ
After standing in line for days, watching consumers purchase these milkshakes, CC and his team realized that more than half of milkshake consumers were buying them early in the morning for their car commute ๐
To more inclusive & interesting conversations in 2021 ๐ฅ
Here are 54 women I follow on @twitter and learn from everyday. I follow both men and women, and I learn from both. Please RT if you do too, and amplify their voices.
Applying software to highly regulated / intermediated industries like education and healthcare is so tricky.
When well-meaning technologists dive into these industries they slam into quite a few things. Human systems prove harder to hack.
A thread:
โ ๏ธ 1st problem: more than usual inertia around the status quo.
There are often multiple stakeholders who have fought to build distinct moats or for whom the status quo simply is profitable, and it distorts economic, productivity, and outcomes-based incentives.
โ ๏ธ 2nd problem: disconnect between users, stakeholders and payers.
Where normally, design principles teach us to find a deep stakeholder problem and solve it, here you can do that and still not find a payer for it (ever).
Sometimes it takes a few startups, raising several rounds of venture funding, and going through an acquisition process โ before founders understand some of the *unwritten dynamics in venture capital.*
#1: Raising more money does not automatically translate into building a more valuable startup.
Yโall will debate me fiercely on this one, but historically, this is true. Please see @epaleyโs definitive analysis on this here. techcrunch.com/2016/10/15/oveโฆ
#2: Growing into a high valuation is highly binary.
Like accelerating into a curve and hoping you make it... t he key proof point will be at your next round of funding, not this one.