As awful as that sounds to many people it just isn't enough to build an amazing product, write great code, or design something beautiful. You need to be able to get out there and tell people it exists in order to succeed. Without that ability your startup will fail. In fact, in my experience at least, far more companies fail because they couldn't reach customers than fail because they couldn't build something. Building something is the easy bit.
You can have the best castle, but if no-one visits, what use is it?
I've met too many programmers with great ideas and execution, but have failed with marketing/sales because they think it's all fluff. Communication is key.
Unless you're audience is as technical as you are, the layperson on the street will not know the difference between 2 products given numerous similarities. They NEED to be told that one product is better and just want to talk to a real person to explain how the damned thing works.
Good UX is primary. Good code is secondary. When good UX and good code fail, good human interaction is what is the kicker.
Building something is certainly easy. Building something people want and works well is pretty hard. Unless you have the latter, all the sales and marketing won't do much for you unless you have an established legacy walled garden that people are forced to use.
The past decades and even now, people tend to expect programmers to do everything related to tech.
This fairytale is why so many fail.
Building something people want is marketing? Requirements gathering? Business analysis? Project management? Engineering? These are just subdivisions of marketing?
It's common place now for people to think of 'marketing' as 'advertising'. It is a much more robust subject than that. This is driven largely by the product management role being so closely integrated to the engineering flow. As I understand it, traditionally product management was a marketing department role. You can see this more with non-software companies like food or transportation.
I'd say it is more accurate to characterize your points as a "marketing feasibility analysis". But this is as much my opinion based on my understanding of marketing, as it is actual "marketing of a product" per se.
bobbybottleservice (at) me (dot) com
(it's a throwaway alias - don't make a judgement on the name.)
The other important factor is validating keyword intent. You need identify some action that indicates the likelihood of a user paying for your service. If you can measure that and combine this data with search volume, you will be in a good position to assess your products feasibility.
(it's a throwaway alias - don't make a judgement on the name.)
(it's a throwaway alias - don't make a judgement on the name.)