One of the maxims I adopted from a mentor was that good execution of a mediocre idea will beat poor execution of a great idea. So far, it's been true everywhere I look.
We're surrounded with decent execution of horrible ideas.
Meant with all due respect, but.. I think you've got it backwards? Great ideas have no innate value, they're easy to come up with.
Disputable. Many people have many ideas. Just the mass alone diminishes the general value of ideas.
> A poorly executed good idea can easily out perform a well executed bad idea.
Also disputable. For the evaluation, result matters most. And a bad idea which still solves a problem, is better than a good idea which just exists in its own isolated bubble, doing nothing worthful.
The tech-world is full of fancy oversmart ideas and their implementations. Yet many of them fail because neither a good idea, nor some half decent implementation alone have enough worth to survive.
That'd be something I've never seen. Any examples?
Ideas are worthless on their own. Building them is what matters. This takes time and skill. Most people on a site like this have the skills to build on an app idea, but everyone has varying levels of time. So if I post an idea here, there's a good chance someone with more time than me will read it, and might steal it. If I sit on the idea until I eventually get around to executing it, then the chance of someone beating me to market is much lower.
The worst thing that could happen is that I never build it, and no one else does either, so the world misses out. That's personally less of a problem for me than watching someone steal my idea.
I think describing the process of telling someone a good idea, and having them act on it, as "stealing" your idea is not necessarily a healthy way of thinking about ideas.
More valuable would be prescient knowledge of social trends, a team that's really good at execution, or knowledge of some existing pain point that still doesn't have a solution.