I was referring to the over-the-top woke stuff that made it hard to believe at times. But yeah it's no guarantee. Ideally she shouldn't have control, just veto power.
413 karma · joined June 12, 2018
I think you’re right though, I don’t know for a fact that that’s true. Nobody can really know the deeper reasons behind this move.
But my point is that people should stop looking at Elon musk as a “fun and weird guy doing crazy things” and more as a ruthless shark who will take whatever is required to win. Which is typical of Silicon Valley CEOs
But I don’t think that’s what he’s trying to do right now.
Instead, he understands that the main asset of twitter is owning peoples network and relationships. If we had a simple way to migrate all our relationships elsewhere all at once, everyone would have jumped ship already.
So the biggest threat to him is other social platforms that try to replicate / copy the social graph of twitter.
That’s what substack is doing behind the scenes for years with their newsletter product, and now they announced a direct competitor to twitter.
This is an existential threat to twitter, so musk sets out to destroy them. Not because it’s best for its users, but because it will make sure they never get a good enough alternative to leave.
And in the end, people will stay on twitter because the core value isn’t the ux or who the CEO is. The value is that they invested years into relationships and network effects, and don’t want to lose them.
I don’t think musk is crazy, although he is brutal, sociopathic and ruthless. I think he’s simply making power moves to keep his advantage.
Similar to how Jobs set out to destroy Adobe by removing Flash from iPhones. How Apple set to hurt Facebook by removing ad tracking. Or how Amazon shamelessly copies successful marketplace sellers to get more profits.
Ruthless power moves, not ideal for users, but not craziness.
I’m trying to figure out what was so magical about the course that I can apply to a more regular product startup. The fact that it sells logos is just how it is now, but what other things could we sell that makes people get 10x perceived value, like the course does. give them leverage as you mentioned.
And it’s not just the product. A different positioning could do wonders as well. For example a logo sounds finite and one time, but unlimited branding assets and advice to build your product arguably sounds way more valuable. And it doesn’t require much change in our core product, just different positioning, put different features forward and rework how the product is delivered. But the core is the same.
I’m probably just too optimistic but really excited about this, feels like this course thing opened my eyes.
Yeah I think some people confuse copycats with competitors:
- Copycats who just flat out copy your design / messaging / landing page: that's something to complain about
- Someone doing a product that solves a similar problem but build their own solution and design: that's perfectly normal and acceptable
Building the audience took about a year and a half. But what made it easier is that I didn’t set out to build it just to sell the course, it was mostly a byproduct of trying to form connections and get more awareness for my startup. Then the course was just a way to capitalize on it even more.
And that’s actually a third thing I learned from selling this course: selling people the outcome works better than selling the product.
One of the reasons why my startup isn’t there yet is because I focus too much on trying to sell the product, and almost never mention the outcome (in reality, I’m not even sure what that is). With my course I did the reverse and it worked better.
I don’t plan to take any drastic decisions about my startup, just experiment and see how it performs. But I appreciate the heads up.
After 4 months, the course had made more profits than the startup in 3 years. It has also taken less time to build (5months total to plan, record and edit)
I was both happy and sad when that happened, because as much as making money by teaching others is gratifying, my dream is to build and grow product startups.
However it taught me two valuable lessons about why people buy things:
- contrary to an online SaaS tool, a course is something you can buy anytime and then consume whenever you want in the future, with no expiration date. so if you see a good offer or love the product at first sight, there is no need to wait and postpone the purchase decision. This increases conversions + makes limited promotional offers more effective
- Seems weird but simply owning a course is enough to bring people significant value, that’s why most of them don’t even bother to watch it. It gives them an “insurance” that they have the knowledge handy whenever they need it. It’s perceived as an investment that will come in handy someday. This also drives purchases.
I considered becoming a full-time course creator, because it’s easier than building a startup, but my heart isn’t in it.
So instead I’m trying to apply the lessons learned to my startup:
- how can I offer a product people can purchase anytime and use whenever they want?
- can I make my product valuable to own, and not just valuable to use?
I think doing both could significantly improve conversions.
I’m all for making cities pedestrian only, but you also need to build a comfortable way to go there. Paris is only doing half of the job.
- it’s not killed, it’s paused
- it’s not because of deepfakes, it’s because of extraordinary demand and abuse
- Apple initially positioned it as a fashion accessory, which few people cared about
- the public wanted it to be like a smartphone on your wrist, and were let down by the limited features
Then Apple realized the value was in the health features. They started positioning it properly and people bought it more. All at the same time the tech improvements made the watch more capable and started becoming even more useful. But at the core, it’s the health focus + typical Apple ease of use and quality that made it take off.
I can see the same trajectory happen with VR:
- Apple starts positioning it as a metaverse / HoloLens type headset, which few people care about
- People assume it’s an « iMac in VR » type device and get disappointed that it isn’t.
But over time, Apple realizes that the number one value is in gaming, and gradually shifts focus and positioning. It attracts more and more people while at the same time the tech improves. Then eventually the tech allows for a headset that can fit in a smaller for factor and truly helps people beyond gaming. As an enhancement to day to day tasks with light enough glasses for example.
The problem with many indie hackers is that they just build products to have fun and try to make a quick buck.
They take a basic idea and run with it, adding one more competitor to an already jamed market. No serious research or vision. So they get some buzz in the community at launch, then it dies off and they move on to the next idea. Rinse and repeat.
Rarely do they take the time to, for example, interview customers to figure out a defensible MOAT that unlocks the next stage of growth.
Those that do though usually manage to build awesome businesses. For example the guy who built browserbear also runs bannerbear which is one of the top tools in his category.
They key is to not stop at « code a fun project in a weekend » and actually learn the other boring parts required to grow a legit business overtime.
Source: I’m an indie hacker
1. When you have enough money to not worry about your health, food, and other basic needs, you are definitely happier
2. beyond that, the increase in happiness depends on what parts of human existence you value the most. If travelling and staying in luxury hotels are your thing, then you will benefit a lot. But if what makes you happy is just to spend time in nature and with family, you will only benefit a little.