Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Most startups get to pivot. Deep Tech usually gets one shot. "They raised $100 million to put out one product, and if that product is not a smashing success, they're in trouble." Shahin Farshchi explains the brutal reality of Deep Tech investing at Lux Capital When you burn millions...

18,115 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

OPINION: How bad is the tech reviewer market? You have mainstreamers literally angry at their viewership for not watching product or tech videos that they can't possibly afford the product in it. I am researching PC parts to update my build. I start watching reviews and a surprising amount came to light - - Tech market is in shambles thanks to a considerable number of things well ahead of the consumers. - If you think inflation is bad on the food shelves, take a look at the tech industry. - Some tech reviewers have started a mental collapse because they got used to the high life. Reviewing only kit for the rich. And now they are mad that viewers have stopped watching. REACTION TO CLIP: My thoughts on this and a reaction to one of the mainstreamers in the attached video. -What the reality is, is that tech reviewers have lost touch with the fact that the U.S people are struggling to make ends meet. - The last thing we want to see, is whining because we didn't make it to your sponsor clip to make you money. - When whining about viewership, it's a known fact that you don't drag a competitor that is doing better than you to whine about how you should be doing better. It shows underly pride issues. Just because you get to the top doesn't mean you can just lose touch with your actual tech base. -Most of these tech reviewers got big because they remembered the little guy. The reality is, for these tech reviewers, that's boring. Why do that when corporations are sending out thousands of dollars in kit meant for only the top percentile of consumers. It's fun to play with the latest modern tech. But when a consumer can't afford it, it just gets them depressed. So, these reviewers start laying on the guilty and blame, which drives away even more viewers. FINAL THOUGHTS: I purposely left out some of the more immature things. I really enjoyed Linus and learned to build a PC many years ago thanks to him. But I see a downward spiral happening for these mainstreamers that have gotten wealthy off of the tech market. Markets shift. I don't know what else to say. But it was defeating to see what I considered to be one of my main goes to people lash out and say that we are ignorant if we don't watch his reviews. That a large majority are buying parts without watching or reading reviews. Thats simple not true. The Tech YouTube market is saturated now. That's not the consumer's fault. I hope things turn around for a few of these mainstreamers. Linus is only an example. Not the only one. Linus Tech Tips Linus LinusMediaGroup #TechReviews #PCParts #PCBuild #NVIDIA #Example #Opinion

Zach@WarfighterBravo

157,901 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Marc Andreessen on the 3 things he looks for when investing in a startup The first thing Marc Andreesen looks for is a big market: “Is there a big existing market that you think you can go after and displace incumbents? Or do you believe there will be a new market that will be big?” The second thing he looks for is a 10x better product: “Is there a fundamental technology or economic change that justifies a new company? And the way I always think about that is: Is there a 10x change happening in the technology landscape? Is something 10x faster, 10x cheaper, or 10x better? If it’s not 10x, we as both VCs and entrepreneurs have to ask ourselves if it’s really worth doing because it’s really hard to start new companies . . . Existing companies are usually pretty good at what they do. So for a new company to exist, it has to bring a product to market that’s so much better than what exists that it punches through the status quo.” The third is the team: “Is the team outstanding? . . . You want to have a founding team of complementary skillsets. You want to have at least one super strong technologist — quite possibly more than one. Some of the best startups are actually more than one founding technologist. And then it often helps to have someone who is a marketing or salesperson who has a really good understanding of business.” Marc believes that you need all three of these, but if you’re going to compromise on one of those as an investor, it should be the product: “A great market is a lot easier to make up for with iterative product execution. The problem with a poor or small market is that even if you do a good job on the product, there just aren’t that many customers so it’s hard to ever get big and people get demoralized . . . And then we evaluate the team of a startup by its ability to get into a big market with a good product.”

Startup Archive

17,333 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Q: Should startup founders be able to code? In the clip below, Naval Ravikant gives advice to a startup spending $25k outsourcing product development to external developers: “You guys should be coding from the start. Web and mobile startups are so competitive right now. You have to assume that anything you’re doing, there’s a team of 2-4 dedicated, hardcore hackers working 24/7 on something extremely similar.” He continues: “If you have this iteration loop where you have to submit something to someone else and they have to come back to you. Then you’re like ‘no, it wasn’t quite right’ because a lot of stuff was lost in translation, you’re going to get 1-2 cycles per day at best. Meanwhile, that other team is getting 20 cycles per day. It has gotten so intense now that non-coding founders and startups are having a really difficult time adding value at these early stages.” Of course there are some examples of non-technical founding teams building terrific companies (e.g. Craigslist). But they seem to be the exception rather than the rule. As Sam Altman puts it in a separate interview: “For a very long time, the classic co-founding team was one very strong business person and one very strong tech person… now it has shifted towards two really strong tech people. That works a lot of the time and may be better overall.” And I think the reason for this—as Naval points out—is that when you can build the product yourself, your iteration cycles become so much faster. Another quote from Sam Altman in a previous Startup Archive Answer on the importance of fast iteration cycles: “The cycle here is basically: talk to customer to understand pain point → build product to address that → get product in front of user → see what they do → repeat cycle. This cycle is how you iterate and improve. The law of compound growth being what it is: if you can get 2% better every iteration cycle, your iteration cycle is every four hours rather than every four weeks, and you compound that over the course of a few years, you’ll be in a very very different place. Make it one of your top goals to build one of the fastest iterating companies the world has ever seen.”

Michael McGuiness

509,926 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Vinod Khosla on the two most important things to get right when building a company The first thing for a startup to get right is make sure they’re inventing something radically different: “If you’re extrapolating the past to predict the future, the big companies do that very well. Intel knows how to go from a 15nm process to 10 to 7 to 5… Entrepreneurs fundamentally have to invent the future they want in a very different way, and you have to have conviction.” For this reason, Khosla Ventures tends not to invest in startups that are trying to do something “slightly better” (e.g. slightly lower cost, slightly more efficient, etc.) because the risk is too high. As Vinod explains: “If you’re fundamentally reinventing something and changing the assumptions, then you have a lot more time to get it right so there’s a lot more iterations you can do.” Which brings Vinod back to the second thing every founder has to get right: build the right team. “If you get the right team — it doesn’t even matter if you get the spec right — it will iterate to the right answer, and almost all good startups do that. This is why the team is more important than the market you pick.” However, you must make sure to foster a culture of debate and disagreeing: “If there’s a single founder and you’re dictating terms, you’re not going to evolve… You have to set up a culture so that it doesn’t matter if you’re senior or junior — you speak up if you have a concern or an idea. You’ll detect problems much earlier, and as a group you can evolve your direction.” Vinod points out that this is one of the reasons Andy Grove started the casual, dress-down culture of Silicon Valley in the 70s: “He wanted an engineer — whether they were junior or senior or a VP — to speak up and not be intimidated that the executives were all wearing ties and coats.” Source: South Park Commons (Apr 2025)

Startup Archive

20,015 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat