Ask YC: What should one skimp on? | Hacker News Reader

Ask YC: What should one skimp on?

There are a lot of articles on hacker news about how important it is not to skimp on x for x = lawyers, graphic designers, people, people not in your core competency, marketing, gear, chairs, etc. I'd like to ask the opposite: of all the things a startup usually buys, what should one skimp on?

View on HN

Of all the things a startup usually buys, what should one skimp on?

I would say the bottom line is skimp on things that do not directly have a significant impact on your valuation, profitability, primary product/service, or ability to "do well" in your business.

A shorter way to say this is don't spend money on things outside of what you are doing.

There is no reason for fancy furniture, ping-pong tables, the absolute latest computer hardware (unless critical to your startup), or any of the other 'perks' of a stereotypical startup.

After you are beyond the initial startup phase, then you could make arguments for nicer secondary items, to attract talent, or create a certain work environment.

Desks. A perfectly functional desk can be constructed out of an ordinary door in mere minutes.

http://web.archive.org/web/20010606140033/image.pathfinder.c...

mm.... I would buy cheap desks. you know the $50 kind. And the cheap chairs are always the most comfortable, believe it or not.

I can't stand working at a desk without a proper keyboard tray and mouse pad.

In many ways having a comfortable working environment is very important. But comfortable != luxurious. Keep it cheap, just not so cheap that you can't get work done because it's not comfortable.

>And the cheap chairs are always the most comfortable, believe it or not.

Surely spoken by someone who has never sat in an Aeron...

don't even know what that is. But chair brands don't matter to me. From what I have had to choose from in office supply/department stores. The cheap ones are more comfy than the expensive ones on average, and especially on a cost/value ratio.

> But chair brands don't matter to me.

Surely spoken by someone who has never sat in an Aeron...

>>And the cheap chairs are always the most >>comfortable, believe it or not.

>Surely spoken by someone who has never sat >in an Aeron...

I've sat in many an Aeron. It's the Slackware of chairs. IMHO it takes weeks to get all the settings right, and at the end of the process you've still got the unsettling feeling that your ass feels really hot for some reason not fully apparent.

Surely spoken by someone without back problems caused by sitting in bad, cheap, chairs.

Another vote for Herman Miller chairs, by the way. I've tried Humanscale and Knoll, but find that I don't like them and keep coming back to the Aeron and the Mirra. Great chairs, very supportive and comfortable.

> Surely spoken by someone without back problems caused by sitting in bad, cheap, chairs.

Allow me to recommend the humble Pilates/gym ball. Comfortable, fun to bounce around on while thinking, and does wonders for your back. Plus, at £7 from your nearest Tesco, the price point is most definitely startup-compatible :)

The nearest Tesco is a few thousand miles away. Cheaper for me to just buy an Aeron.

Assuming that by "skimp on" you mean "spend sparingly on a necessity," I'll preemptively refrain from rambling about what's probably not necessary for a tech startup.

Of course, one of my new hobbies, since making the voyage out here, has been to practice the wonderfully fun and interesting "make vs buy" comparison game. You can, and probably will have many opportunities to play this game as a startup founder. This game involves simply asking yourself and/or your team numerous questions of a basic logistical nature:

A) How much does X cost to make, if I get to (or have to, depending on the day) make it myself? B) How much does X cost to buy? C) What are the costs, inclusive of shipping/assembly, for scenarios A and B? D) Do I have anything that can be improvised or are there any possible substitutes that can serve the ultimate purpose of X (i.e. using a door as a desk) in the mean-time? E) How long can I "live" with the improvised substitute or the idea of an improvised substitute? F) How much of the actual value of X is imagined; that is, how much have my perceptions been influenced by hype or advertising?

Questions E and F can get complicated, as they relate quite a bit back to the original posit about "necessities" and such. Probably I'm too tired to go into them at the moment, so perhaps in the morning.

I therefore recommend being pretty weary of anything involving hidden "lock-in" costs resultant from usurping alternatives; for example, anything involving a contract probably fits into this category.

Regarding brand loyalty. . . remember that there's a big difference between purchasing actual quality and purchasing advertised "quality." When factoring in costs associated with advertising, the make vs. buy comparison game really can take a person full circle.

I would worry a lot more about where you spend your time than your money.

Premature optimization.

For most Web 2.0 startups, you can also skip IE6 support, at least in the beginning.

Are you joking? IE6 is still a massive percentage of visitors. It's not hard to do, unless you're just lazy. IE6 is definately not something to skimp on.

if you write standard html4 and make sure that you use css that IE supports (even if it's not quite right) you can wait on the IE optimization. because it should still work.

All of that in addition to the fact that most early adopters of your site will be on FF, or really anything other than IE6(7).

I agree with this. Knuth quipped that 'Premature optimization is the root of all evil.' Get your stuff working correctly first, attract an audience, then if your current set up is lacking, try to optimize, or just throw more hardware at it. Hardware is typically cheaper than human time.

IE6 is still a significant %, and in most cases will be the second biggest browser for a Web site. In one large random sample on one of my sites, IE is 90% and IE6 is 45% of those.

Graphic design, if your concept or implementation is really stellar. Google and Reddit get by just fine. I've noticed that sites such as Digg will actually reduce graphics when redesigning the page, reducing clutter and bandwidth at the same time.

That is, as long as your target audience isn't primarily composed of Apple users. Then it's graphics all the way!

''Most people make the mistake of thinking design is what it looks like,'' says Steve Jobs, Apple's C.E.O. ''People think it's this veneer -- that the designers are handed this box and told, 'Make it look good!' That's not what we think design is. It's not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works.''

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E7D8113BF...

He specified "Graphic Design" and there he is probably right, if only because your typical hacker will un-self-consciously design a graphical monstrosity. My answer to the OP's question is: "Everything outside your core competence". It's relative, of course...

With the lavish resources they can throw at any project, it seems hardly appropriate for us to try to develop like them.

The best design is one you don't notice. To make a page look simple and "good", you need a skilled designer.

One data point -- I'm not a skilled designer and have tried to "keep things simple". My sites still end up looking like crap :) That is why I let the designers design, though.

Making something complex is easy. Making something simple is hard.

People often say that what they design ends up looking like crap. But that's like saying that your program "ends up" working like crap. If it's not good enough, all it means is it's unfinished.

It isn't just a matter of who your target audience is. It's also what their relationship is to the information you're managing. More detail than you probably want re. my struggle with this issue can be found here:

http://ourdoings.com/2008-02-12

an office space, office furniture, luxury items like candy/soda

Hire people with laptops and you don't need to buy a lot of computers. Build a bigger office network when you have the money coming in to buy machines.

Is the answer, everything too vague? I would say the first place to skrimp is lifestyle, and from there, build up.

do not spend on people who dont understand customers

Reply on news.ycombinator.com