Working full-time and building https://xitter.cf/t.co/YZOePhwQ8w, https://xitter.cf/t.co/Jr2a1PrfEd, https://xitter.cf/t.co/1pP9XDFnoq

Joined March 2015
Incredible investigative deep dive on the HONEY browser extension scam. 🔥 Watch the full thing on YT.
Here's how @PayPal @honey has been stealing money from influencers:
230
1,876
66
31,906
1,690,041
v0 is impressive, this looks much better than my landing page on carrd.. I'm gonna stop creating landing page manually
1
113
TinySeed network’s on my radar. Curious if joining could open some doors. Anyone here part of it? What’s your take?
85
Exploring Organic Methods 🌱 Instead of just spending money, what if I focus on creating valuable content that resonates? Learning about pain points & audience feels more meaningful at this stage. #IndieHackers #buildinpublic
69
I'm surprised, taskblock has reached 62 users! Mostly through organic search on chrome store because I have not been paying attention to it lately.
3
1
97
I'm thinking about that! Need to learn how to do customer development 😅
1
43
Jason Wu retweeted
This response from @jasonfried has made me question so many things about how I approach work.
25
63
13
937
82,484
Google ads networks sucks. It turns on by itself when you restart a campaign and leave you wonder where your conversion has gone for days
1
34
I was left with just 0.15% of my own VC-backed Startup. (may happen to anyone). In 2013, I worked as a part-time CTO in several software startups in a startup incubator. On one of the “Friday beer” evenings, I was approached by a huge old man. He broke the ice, touched my shoulder, and behaved like we were old friends. He knew who I was and made me feel so safe. It all looked random to me, but it wasn’t. Years later, he revealed: “I moved into this incubator because I wanted to hire you.” CoFounder He was about to start a hardware startup, a hardware product that looked like it was made by Apple. This idea felt so compelling (compared to easy software tools I worked on) that I had no doubt and joined him as a CTO and CoFounder. I got 15% of the company. Rich Man He was a rich man with a huge house in the city's best luxury area and a big exit in the past. He kept saying: “I can’t do this without you..”. He was a master of psychology, and I'd do anything for him, he was my mentor, like a father. I did my best job ever, working days and nights and sleeping on the office couch with 20-hour shifts. We had lots of orders, and I was putting the software and hardware together, driving it to the clients, and installing it. I was obsessed; My girlfriend left me because we didn’t see each other. I would be home when she was asleep and leave before she woke up. Equity Whenever we hired someone, the founder would give them equity, and I asked him why he gave out equity so easily. He said: I know how to return it back when needed. I didn't get what he meant, but I learned this in a very painful way later, that I'll share at the end of the story. Living A Dream Things were going really well, We met Jack Dorsey (founder of Twitter and Square) in SF and presented our machine. We partnered with his company, which was making the payment stands, to use them for our machine. Lots of doors were open. We raised money from investors and got into the best B2B accelerator in the world, Silicon Valley. Break up While things were going really well, I engaged with a new girl. She got pregnant while studying in Norway. I was traveling between SF and Oslo, and it was too difficult while having an infant. I felt like I had no control over my life. I had to fly to meet partners, VCs, and a co-founder. Everything was on their terms, so I had to adapt. It all led to me breaking up with the girl. My life was a mess, and I couldn't move to SF because it meant I couldn't see my kid. I decided to leave the startup. I spent a year hiring more people, delegating, and finding a new guy to replace me as CTO. The replacement went very well, so eventually, I left, and the company did great without me. Poor Founder Risk I moved on with my new startup, but a few months later, I got an email from the board. They were planning a new funding round, which looked good to me. So, at first, I was happy about that; it meant my shares would be worth more. But it turned out they were planning an internal downturn, in which all investors had to contribute because they had inflated the expenses so much that the company needed an urgent investment. I was the only shareholder who wasn't rich. It was relatively little money for all the investors, but for me, it was more than I could afford. Since I owned 15% and couldn’t participate in the round, my 15% was diluted to 0.15%. Why? It turns out that in a VC-funded startup, it’s very easy to lose all almost your equity if the startup decides to have an internal round and issue new shares. It may have 100 shares, I own 15 and others own 85. Then it may issue 1000 shares, where each costs 10k. So I’d have to put 150k to stay with my 15%. (the numbers aren’t real, just for an example). So, this was the end of the story for me. I worked 100 hours a week for 3 years at the expense of my personal life & health. The moral: Owning equity in a startup doesn’t protect you unless you’re rich or important to the startup. People often ask me: why do you hate VCs so much? Well, here is why. And this is just one story. I have four more.
111
53
18
740
105,264
Here's a common startup situation. A team busts their ass for months building the first version of their product. It's almost done. Now a big question emerges -- how do you get the first people to use your product? Hmm... If you find yourself at this moment, then you are already in a bad place. 99% of startups are not differentiated on their underlying technology, and there is very little engineering risk involved. (I'm ignoring deep tech and foundational AI research companies, for the sake of this conversation). Because technology differentiation is no longer a real factor today start ups, it turns out that most products are succeeding or failing due to core product/market fit followed by the distribution strategy. There are over 9 million mobile apps. There are a billion websites. Figuring out distribution is key. This is why I think startups end up needing both: 1) an insight about customers that gives them product/market fit 2) an insight about distribution that creates traction People building products often have an easier time product/market fit because they are building for themselves, or a customer that they already know well. But the latter, about distribution, is often super difficult because once you onboard your friends and family, and look to expand the next set of hundreds of customers, you then dive into the world of growth marketing strategies and tactics which are its own very particular learned skill set. Sometimes when there's a new breakthrough technology, as with what is happening in AI, or the Apple vision Pro, or Web3, it's simply enough that the product has a "it works" feature. By simply being there on the scene when adoption of a new platform is happening, distribution happens automatically. I think that's why we see that so many new great startups are launched right at the beginning of the platform. But what happens when you are trying to launch the 9,000,001th mobile app? The first thing you do, naturally, is to try to read what's out there. The other counterintuitive thing, is that although most of the knowledge in writing out there pertains to channels like SEO or paid marketing or influencer campaigns, many of these tactics best fit already successful products that have money and aim to accelerate growth. Many of these tactics simply won't apply to you because they'll be too expensive, or they will use mature marketing channels that just won't be that effective. I often joke that by the time there's a case study about a new marketing tactic or channel, the advantage has already been arbitrage away, and probably no longer works. So what should you do instead? Ideally the product and the distribution hypotheses happen at the same time, and reinforce each other. The Dropbox founders describe to me at the inception of their product, that sharing folders was part of the vision and was built in quite quickly. And later years this drove a significant amount of growth. Uber has natural virality because you often ride in a car with other people, or you ride a car to see somebody, and naturally you'll mention the service. A product for creators, like Substack, will naturally encourage people on the platform to write and share content, attracting an audience who ultimately may also be writers themselves. Zoom, and other apps that help collaboration in the workplace, have natural features that cause you to bring in your coworkers as you use the product experience. These are all examples of the best form of distribution, which are baked in to the product idea itself, rather than bolted on at the end. Even once you have a basic theory for how your product will naturally distribute itself, you'll still need to identify the first generation of users to help iron out all the issues, and give you feedback on whether your hypotheses were correct. In my years of studying new product launches, I can confidently say that the early years are often very idiosyncratic, and constantly changing. The reason for this of course is that marketing channels change all the time, but subscale ones that help you get your first couple thousand users, change even more so. A few years ago you saw a trend were products would launch a huge conferences like SXSW. These days you see more effort on getting influencers involved early. Or "building in public" which makes yourself into an influencer. Several years ago many consumer products (like dating sites, new photo apps, etc) would launch on college campuses via the Greek system, because they were organized ways to reach thousands of undergraduate students. These days the organizations are often inundated with start up requests, and it's become less effective. As a result all of these initial channels change all the time, and it's up to the founders to figure out how to take advantage of what might work today. The problem with these initial channels is that they eventually tap out. Thus starts the journey of startups to grow and expand their portfolio of distribution channels, beginning with small and highly relevant ones, into the biggest channels. I sometimes imagine a X Y axis, where X is volume of the channel, and Y is responsiveness. Early channels are often very low volume. But you want that. The reason is that they are highly relevant and they are small enough that larger companies do not focus on them. As I mentioned influencers are often an example of this, but so are niche newsletters, or or event marketing. However if you find this channel to be successful, you'll also eventually one more scale. This involves you jumping onto the next set of channels, which will provide more volume but be much more competitive as a result. Often times this is a period where you have one channel that kind of works, and you're testing a few other channels simultaneously. Your efforts here should be experimental and iterative. You can often look at direct competitors as well as adjacent products and see what they're doing, to inspire you on the right channel. The natural cadence of products will indicate to you the channels that are most likely to work. If you have episodic usage, you'll probably need to do SEO/SEM, affiliate, or referral -- something that helps you target high intent users. If you're product is social or helps with workplace collaboration, then you might lean into referral programs and viral growth. Products in commerce naturally lead you towards paid ads, contact creators, etc. You can often learn a lot by talking to other people in your industry or an adjacent industries to see what works. This is where sometimes I'll see people working on episodic usage apps, like travel/health/etc asking the question, how do I make my product virally? I want free users! Of course the problem is, there's a natural fit between a product and it's distribution channels. Even though you might want free distribution, only very specific niches of networked products are able to grow freely. Generally everybody else must pay for their distribution, whether via referral or advertising. Eventually you want to move on the XY axis towards volume. There are only about a dozen large scale distribution channels that can propel a product to scale. Advertising is on that list, SEO too, and so is viral growth. But these larger channels, by their nature, are both highly scaled but also have low responsiveness. As a result, you end up competing with some of the most famous brands in the industry as a result. Who wants to buy ads against the same audiences as major credit card or airlines? They have insanely high payback periods, and huge marketing budget, and are not that cost sensitive. Ironically, this is where great products become to dominate. I started this discussion with the dual requirement of product/market fit, and distribution. But in the end, product/market fit actually dominates. The reason is the following -- the ability for a company to operate out in these most expensive and highly scaled channels comes from having a great product that generates a ton of word of mouth. More natural usage, the less marketing that has to be done. And the marketing costs that do exist end up being blended in with the large number of organic users. The journey of a new product is to move, from unscaled and relevant, to highly scaled. And at the end, great products win.
76
203
49
1,679
514,511
🐻 new landing page for my chrome extension, Theodore AI that helps you understand confusing topics in 3 clicks seems like the stripe buy buttons don't play nice with chrome extensions using manifest v3 so had to embed them on the landing page and not directly in the extension itself aiming to ship before feb 1st, follow along if you want more updates 🤝 p.s. would you pay for this? #buildinpublic
5
1
1
9
648
converting the @pairprogram dashboard to a "preview" ui so you don't need to be logged in to view the dashboard, feed, posts, etc. this gives users a solid idea of what the platform is like before committing to anything certain pages and actions will trigger the login modal, prompting the user to apply for access. #buildinpublic
1
1
2
275
Google ads results are in! Total cost: $77.53 Cost per click: $1.76 - good? Conversion: 23% - okay? Cost per conversation $7.75 - high Email Confirmation: 1 - XD Form filled: 0 - :( What this tells me: the problem is not painful enough. People are not willing to get over a small hurdle in the signup process #buildinpublic #indiedev
1
4
138
Spent an hour setting up an ad campaign then got suspected for no legitimate reason... Thanks @GoogleAds
1
91
Switching back to @carrd because it's just easier to use.. #buildinpubic #indiedev
3
143