
How to Succeed with a Startup [video] - CyrusL
https://blog.ycombinator.com/sam-altman-how-to-succeed-with-a-startup/
======
rexreed
I'll counter with some more basic and more broadly applicable advice.

1) Build a product people actually want and need and will pay money for

2) Promote yourself incessantly because others will be promoting themselves
even more incessantly.

3) Spend your money wisely - focus on people, product, and marketing. Don't
waste your money on office trappings and stuff that makes you feel good. Save
your lunch money.

4) Ignore Venture Capital. If you are actually selling something people want,
you can grow on revenues. If it takes a lot of money to create what your
customers want or if your growth is greater than revenue, then the VCs will
want to talk to you anyways. Because a) you're growing and b) customers
actually want what you have. But don't start by focusing on what VCs want.
Focus on what your customers want instead.

5) Always be selling. To your customers. To the press. To your employees. To
anyone who matters. Never stop talking about your company.

6) Always be listening. To your customers. To your employees. The easiest and
best ideas come from others.

7) Re-invest. Plow your earnings back into the company and promotion.

8) It's ok not to have a competitive advantage. What? Ok maybe you need to
have some advantage but it doesn't have to be nearly as significant as is
stated in this video. You need to have some reason for your customers to buy
your product or service instead of competitors', so there's always some
advantage. It could be price. Features. better service. But it could also be
just a better connection with your prospects. Or perhaps you manage to place
yourself in the right place at the right time. Or maybe you're just spending a
lot on marketing. If you want to be successful, you need to identify at least
one FAIR competitive advantage that your customers care about. And if you want
to be super successful, identify one UNFAIR competitive advantage that locks
out the competition. That could be an exclusive partnership, some intellectual
property advantage, or connections with your customers that your competitors
can't easily obtain.

This applies no matter if you're running a silicon valley style startup or a
cybersecurity enterprise-focused government client startup -- both can make
you millions or billions.

~~~
ryeguy_24
To simplify further:

1\. Be good at product management

2\. Do marketing a lot

3\. Be smart financially

4\. Be smart financially

5\. Do marketing a lot

6\. Be good at product management

7\. Be smart financially

8\. Be good at product management

~~~
sabujp
don't forget product must pass toothbrush test, be simple enough for people to
understand, and be the greatest thing since sliced gluten free bread

------
sinatra
\- "Product so good that people wanna tell others about it" doesn't mean this
is an excuse to hide in a corner and keep building the product. Product can't
be "good" if it's not based on frequent and lots of conversations /
interactions with users.

\- The point about "exponential growth in market" is very important if your
startup wants to raise money from VCs and has similar goals. Otherwise,
focusing on creating value even in mature markets can be a good choice too.
Same point applies to the "Huge if it works" point too.

\- His point about real trend vs fake trend is also a good point for your own
product's real usage vs fake usage. Are people "really" engaged and using your
product or are they just thinking that it's cool but not really using it?

\- I have nothing to add to what he said about the team, but team is so
important that I wanted to mention it as well.

\- His point about optimism is another point where team (or advisors or well-
wishers) help. A startup is a roller-coaster. You will have days of negativity
and doubts. At that moment, a team member (or someone similar) who pushes you
and encourages you is very important!

\- Love the points about "We'll figure it out" and "I've got it"

\- "Bias towards action" doesn't mean being busy for the sake of being busy.
In my career, I've seen so many months wasted because action wasn't based on
well-thought-out logic. So, certainly keep bias towards action, but don't use
it as no excuse to not think. A good way to not move fast is to move fast in
unnecessary directions.

\- The "Never lose momentum" point is so difficult in real world (unless
you're lucky). But, good to be reminded about.

\- The point about "Distribution startegy" is another great point. Every
distribution strategy we are thinking of is going to turn out to be harder
than we thought. Still, finding new / unexplored distribution sources compared
to your competition can be a great win!

\- I am sure this wasn't intentional, but I'll say that the talk didn't focus
enough on users / customers. In the end, it's all about creating genuine value
for the customers / users.

~~~
Alex3917
> Product can't be "good" if it's not based on frequent and lots of
> conversations / interactions with users.

It also can't be good if you're not implementing the ideas being surfaced in
those interactions, and implementing takes longer than talking with people. If
you have a conversation with someone and end up building something they ask
for that takes six weeks of full time work, then does it really make sense to
delay the timeline on shipping that feature so that you can keep talking with
more potential users who will likely have the same objections anyway? I'm not
trying to justify not talking with users, but at the same time once you've
gotten the message, it may be time to hang up the phone.

~~~
jerrre
Don't change your product based on one conversation.

------
fermienrico
I find Sam Altman's advice on startup completely and utterly useless. They're
akin to the "How to become a millionaire" books. I've said this in the past
[1] that providing generic advice doesn't work for startups. Every company is
unique and they have unique challenges. Instead, Sam should be focusing on
bringing stories of various startups in light, interview their founders and
have a focused discourse on what worked and what didn't for that
__particular__ startup.

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17309725](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17309725)

~~~
projectramo
I sort of disagree in one important sense: all generic advice is pretty
useless.

How to succeed in sports? practice, focus, take care of your diet and health

How to succeed in a large company? keep your boss happy, work hard, focus

etc

This is not Altman's fault. I don't think the videos can -- or are supposed to
-- replace actual detailed daily advice on struggles which, presumably, you
get if you join Ycombinator.

I don't think that "focusing on bringing stories of various startups to light"
is all that different from what he is doing. The same criticism applies: it is
their story not yours.

And the same caveat applies: it is a sample of the kind of advice you will
get.

~~~
fermienrico
I think you're right - all generic advice, __by definition__ is not going to
be specific and its utility is questionable.

The problem doesn't just lie in the answer, but the question itself. When you
ask a question such as "How can I do well in life?", that lends itself to
generic bullshit advice.

My problem with Sam Altman is that he keeps perpetuating these kinds of
questions as if he is going to help people. I am disagreeing with both what he
is trying to appoint as a question, i.e. "How to success with a startup?" and
his generic answers to his generic questions.

It helps nobody. Stop asking these questions.

~~~
projectramo
Do you read any kinds of books on how to get better?

I am addicted to them. As a kid I used to read books on judo, karate, the
guitar, programming, and how to be a spy.

I now read books on startups, investing, programming and writing.

The actual improvement comes from the practice, but I still feel the books and
advice play a critical role. They can do the following:

1\. They pump me up to go and practice.

2\. They actually demonstrate particular exercises or thought experiments.

3\. They just get me thinking about the particular item

4\. They make me fell less alone because others are thinking about it

5\. They make the activity seem important in the life affirming sense of it is
worth my time

I think all we can ask of "startup advice" is that it fill a similar niche.

~~~
PacifyFish
I agree.

Even if "generic advice" isn't worth anything else, the psychological benefits
of keeping a subject at the front of your mind, being reminded something is
possible, and building excitement are valuable.

------
ArtWomb
Terrific intro to Startup School v2.0!

In a similar vein to the question "Why do startups win?", which besides having
a rich history of rigorous academic inquiry and to my thinking has never been
adequately resolved.

One can ask, "Why does Startup School work?" And a chief factor is the
imposition of an external hard deadline (Demo Day). As well as the tracking of
performance metrics by a team outside the locus of founders.

To that end, a "Milestone Tracker" interface that is both public and designed
with accountability in mind could be a key component in making things "real"
for participants.

It also occurs to me that in a class of 15K startups, you are going to receive
a lot of "offers" to try products and services from your fellow classmates.
Just in the past hour I got $250 in credits from a cloud analytics startup,
and a discount coupon from a crowdfunding platform for foodies ;)

Manageable for a cohort size in the low hundreds. But perhaps an issue at
scale that may result in missed opportunities.

It may be a good idea to have a centralized site at startupschool.org/offers
with a canonical list of "startup-to-startup" (S2S) deals.

Of course it would be differentiated from third-party credits by the likes of
GCloud, AWS, Stripe, etc

------
jarsin
So has Ycombinator abandoned any hope for VR since he calls it a fake trend in
the first five minutes?

Just curious because I swear saw a blog where they want VR startups to apply
awhile ago but can't find it now.

~~~
madeuptempacct
He is dead wrong if he thinks VR isn't huge in the long-term.

~~~
rpedela
People have been saying that for decades. After spending 10 years in the 3D
graphics and VR industries, I just don't see it happening any time soon. The
technology, including Oculus, is certainly getting better but it still sucks.
It still makes too many people sick. At this point, I am in the "I'll believe
it when I see it" crowd.

~~~
travbrack
For me, the motion sickness problem only happens in games where you're moving
around freely on the ground like an FPS. If a teleporter is used to move, I'm
fine, and for some reason flight sims don't bother me either. It seems like an
inherent problem with the tech due to the disagreement between your inner ear
and visual cues. Anyone have insight?

~~~
mattnewport
Yeah, motion sickness is a non issue at this point for headsets with good 6
DoF tracking as long as you are only doing 1:1 mapped movement (your VR
movements match your real world movements). Teleporting is mostly fine but
rapid frequent teleporting can still cause some issues. Other forms of
locomotion tend to have more issues but some tricks have been developed and
best practices figured out to make it viable for many people for reasonably
long sessions. Virtual "blinkers" to reduce optical flow in peripheral vision
have proved quite effective and are widely used. Pulling yourself through the
virtual environment with your hands also seems to work quite well for many
people (see Lone Echo for example).

------
id_rsa
I like his idea of choosing a startup idea that is in an industry poised for
growth and "riding the elevator."

~~~
tonyedgecombe
If I thought I could pick an industry poised for growth I wouldn't be mucking
about with index funds.

~~~
tim333
The trouble often isn't picking the industry but figuring how to make money
out of it. Like AI and self driving cars are obviously poised for growth but
Google/Alphabet and other large companies are likely to dominate. And a lot of
that is already priced into the stocks.

I remember Altman saying an AI for X startup would be a good idea though. I
guess Cruise Automation played things well.

~~~
tonyedgecombe
Actually neither of those things are obvious to me, AI seems over hyped and
the head of Waymo has stated that ubiquitous self driving cars are 30 years
away. Although perhaps I'm just getting a bit cynical in my old age.

~~~
tim333
Any source on the 30 year thing? They already have test cars driving around
with no one in the front seat
([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPfC9Yfsjd8&t=2m40s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPfC9Yfsjd8&t=2m40s))
and it seems there will be both intense competition to grab market share and
also a push from regulators to reduce the present 1.25 million road deaths per
year.

~~~
tonyedgecombe
[https://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-
think/transportation/sel...](https://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-
think/transportation/self-driving/google-selfdriving-car-will-be-ready-soon-
for-some-in-decades-for-others)

~~~
tim333
Ta for the link though that talk was over two years ago and things have moved
on. Personally I'd be surprised if it took that long.

------
paul7986
\- Be raised rich and or be surrounded by the rich/powerful(Elizabeth Holmes,
Evan Speigel, etc...)

\- Have rich & powerful friends directly or indirectly

\- Impress & become friendly with the rich & powerful either through clear
data that shows your worth an investment(your startup data shows traction) or
lie your butt off; aka fake it before you make it. I always strive(d) for the
former as darn my parents and the morality they instilled.

~~~
sidlls
The tone of your comment is off, but the underlying point has at least some
merit.

~~~
paul7986
Pardon if it comes off jaded, but what I note is very true. I’m in no way
trying to impress Sam Altman like i gather some others may be.

No idea his background... yet did he not go to an Ivy League school?

~~~
ameister14
No, he didn't go to an Ivy League school.

~~~
dpeterson
From wikipedia: "studied computer science at Stanford University". Stanford
isn't Ivy league? Or is wikipedia wrong?

~~~
ameister14
Stanford is not Ivy League.

~~~
paul7986
Umm in 2015/2016 Stanford's tuition was $46k while Harvard was $45k.

If it's not Ivy League why am I paying more to go there then the hallmark ivy
league school?

~~~
fosco
Ivy League is a specific name for north eastern universities in a 'sports
league'

I would consider stanford a top tier school... but ivy league appears to have
a specific definition.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_League#Members](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_League#Members)

------
hashrate
This talk is worth more than 2 Millions Medium Articles.

