
Why Your Startup Shouldn't Copy 37signals or Fog Creek - bdfh42
http://onstartups.com/home/tabid/3339/bid/8354//Why-Your-Startup-Shouldn-t-Copy-37signals-or-Fog-Creek.aspx
======
mechanical_fish
This guy has gone to the zoo and interviewed all the animals. The tiger says
that the secret to success is to live alone, be well disguised, have sharp
claws and know how to stalk. The snail says that the secret is to live inside
a solid shell, stay small, hide under dead trees and move slowly around at
night. The parrot says that success lies in eating fruit, being alert, packing
light, moving fast by air when necessary, and always sticking by your friends.

His conclusion: These animals are giving contradictory advice! And that's
because they're all "outliers".

But both of these points are subtly misleading. Yes, the advice is
contradictory, but that's only a problem if you imagine that the animal
kingdom is like a giant arena in which all the world's animals battle for the
Animal Best Practices championship [1], after which all the losing animals
will go extinct and the entire world will adopt the winning ways of the One
True Best Animal. But, in fact, there are a hell of a lot of different ways to
be a successful animal, and they coexist nicely. Indeed, they form an
_ecosystem_ in which all animals require other, much different animals to
exist.

And it's insane to regard the tiger and the parrot and the snail as
"outliers". Sure, they're unique, just as snowflakes are unique. But, in fact,
there are a lot of different kinds of cats and birds and mollusks, not just
these three. Indeed, there are creatures that employ some cat strategies and
some bird strategies (lions: be a sharp-eyed predator with claws, but live in
communal packs). The only way to argue that tigers and parrots and snails are
"outliers" is to ignore the existence of all the other creatures in the world,
the ones that bridge the gaps in animal-design space and that ultimately
relate every known animal to every other known animal.

So, yes, it's insane to try to follow all the advice on the Internet
simultaneously. But that doesn't mean it's insane to listen to 37signals
advice, or Godin's advice, or some other company's advice. You just have to
figure out which part of the animal kingdom you're in, and seek out the best
practices which apply to creatures like _you_. If you want to be a stalker,
you could do worse than to ask the tiger for some advice.

\---

[1] The ants are gonna win. Hölldobler and Wilson told me so.

~~~
kubrick
Great response! You know, there's nothing wrong with 37 Signals' advice, but
they imply that their advice is for everyone, and I am not sure it is. It's
good advice, excellent advice, especially if your business intentions are
similar to theirs. But we have to beware of any advice that's supposed to be
universal. As in all things, your mileage may vary.

~~~
mechanical_fish
_they imply that their advice is for everyone, and I am not sure it is..._

I think it was Greenspun, but it might have been Strunk and White, who taught
me this secret: Don't equivocate in print. Don't write like this:

"Here's some advice, which may not apply in your particular case: Do X."

or this (which you're more likely to see in actual writing):

"I think X."

Better to write:

"Do X."

or

"X."

Readers tend to understand that your writing comes from _you_ , that it
reflects a certain perspective and is unlikely to be universal truth. It's
usually unnecessary to hammer this point home at the cost of cluttering up
your sentences with clunky disclaimers that are always the same.

When you write, say what you think, straight out. [1] Don't settle for dull
accuracy. If people get mad because something you say is wrong or
overgeneralized, ask forgiveness, not permission.

37signals' work gets read and cited all the time because it is well written.
One of the things that makes it so well written is that it's not larded up
with apologies, disclaimers, and caveats. They assume that their readers are
smart enough to figure out, without being told, that 37signals writes from a
37signals perspective and that your mileage may vary.

\---

[1] Interestingly, _speaking_ can be a different game. There's more room for
artful equivocation. You can sell things with body language. You can vary the
pace between telling it short and straight and telling it long and rambling.
Novel-length writing is also different. We're talking about essays, here.

~~~
JoelSutherland
Fantastic point about the distinction between writing and speaking. Benjamin
Franklin famously trained himself to speak in terms of "modest diffidence":

[http://books.google.com/books?id=D29W3OkXFq4C&pg=PA13...](http://books.google.com/books?id=D29W3OkXFq4C&pg=PA13&lpg=PA13&dq=benjamin+franklin+modest+diffidence&source=web&ots=g4AXYQ40C7&sig=dfXbJQul-
JawahvrUPpBIsyWz0I&hl=en&ei=qo2MSfnPHMOe-
gaqkaifCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result)

------
TomOfTTB
This seems unrelated but I think it actually is a very good counterpoint so go
with me for a sec. When Hitler was invading Europe at the beginning of World
War II Ghandi gave the citizens of Europe this advice...

I want you to lay down the arms you have as being useless for saving you or
humanity. You will invite Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini to take what they
want of the countries you call your possessions. Let them take possession of
your beautiful island with your many beautiful buildings... If these gentlemen
choose to occupy your homes, you will vacate them. If they do not give you
free passage out, you will allow yourself, man, woman and child to be
slaughtered Now, I'm not as famous as Ghandi. But I think I'm qualified enough
to say the above was stupid advice.

Mahatma Ghandi did a great thing for the world in that he popularized a very
powerful tool: Non-violent resistance. But where he failed was in realizing
his one tool didn't apply universally (in this case it only works if the
person you are resisting is decent enough not to throw you in a gas chamber
and kill you en masse)

The same thing is true with the author of this blog.

If I have any advice for him it's to see each "startup success story" as a
tool that can create success in some situations. The responsibility of someone
wanting to use that tool is to determine which situations that tool applies
to.

So when contradictory advice comes along he should ask himself "why did that
tool work for company X and not for company Y?" Then decide whether you are
closer to company X or company Y.

~~~
betterlabs
Its "Gandhi" and not "Ghandi".

~~~
TomOfTTB
Thanks

------
merrick33
It's probably not a good idea not to copy other companies, rather analyze
what's working them and see if you can make it work for you as well.

37Signals gives a ton of good advice when it comes to running a web service,
and some not so good advice.

Here a gem 37Signals provided:

Ask 37signals: How do you process credit cards?
[http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/753-ask-37signals-how-
do-...](http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/753-ask-37signals-how-do-you-
process-credit-cards)

It was so good, that the CEO of Braintree Payment Solutions referenced it when
talking about the same subject:

[http://www.braintreepaymentsolutions.com/blog/annual-
credit-...](http://www.braintreepaymentsolutions.com/blog/annual-credit-card-
billing-subscriptions/)

Now that it's tough to raise money, "copying" 37 Signals and charging for your
products on a monthly recurring basis is spot on for most new web services. I
don't listen to everything they say, but every now and then they have it
figured out.

~~~
axod
>> "Now that it's tough to raise money, "copying" 37 Signals and charging for
your products on a monthly recurring basis is spot on for most new web
services."

I just don't understand the recent backlash against ad supported. Some people
seem to think it's not real money, or doesn't count as much... Fact is there's
insane amounts of money to be made from advertising income.

~~~
bjplink
The problem with ad revenue as a business model is that you're beholden to
something you can't control directly that is controlled by a third party. With
products/subscriptions it's an A to B relationship without the extra C group
of advertisers who actually pay the bills for you.

I disagree that people think it isn't really money though. I believe that
people think it isn't really reliable.

~~~
axod
In my experience, it's amazingly reliable. As long as you're not working with
a single advertiser, or small number. This is one of the reasons adsense is so
successful - you're beholden to 'the market' rather than a single advertiser.

I think it'd be a really bad idea to discount it as a possible business model.

~~~
bjplink
For every person making $XXX a day with AdSense there are a thousand making
$XXX a year. Or things are humming along smoothly until you wake up one
morning and you've been smart priced back to the stone age and aren't making
anything per click anymore. The only guaranteed winner with AdSense is Google
themselves. The reason AdSense is so successful is because Google takes an
unspecified cut of every click and it's an industry built on the back of
ringtone scams and click fraud.

Being beholden to a market that consists of a bunch of AdWords account
managing hooligans that gnash and claw all day to drive bid prices down and
are being governed by Google isn't really the kind of market you want to be
counting on long term. Which just goes back to my point that while things
might be good one day, by relying on an outside party for revenue, you might
wake up tomorrow and be screwed because of decisions made by people totally
unrelated to you or your product.

~~~
axod
I've been generating revenue from online advertising since late 1999. It's
pretty stable and growing :)

>> "it's an industry built on the back of ringtone scams and click fraud."

Sorry but this one is just ridiculous. How much have you used adsense, or any
other affiliate network?

~~~
bjplink
Ha, I knew that one would provoke a response. Click fraud is a very real
problem with AdSense that I wish drew more attention.

I'm going to stop now because this is diverging into a pissing match of sorts,
but I've been in the business of making money with online advertising myself
long enough to feel qualified to comment and pay my bills.

------
jasonfried
Does anyone really believe it's wise to copy anyone? Copying leaves no room
for understanding. Understanding is how you get better.

It's good to be exposed to a variety of perspectives and points of view, but
you have make your own way forward. Take whatever you find useful and leave
the rest behind. Fill in the gaps with your own ideas.

The worst thing you can do is stop thinking for yourself.

~~~
aaronblohowiak
A forum member at banjo hideout's sig is: "Be yourself, everyone else is
taken." I think that applies here as well.

------
wallflower
37Signals and Joel's Fog Creek are well-known brands and cargo cults onto
themselves. I think startups should consider following an emerging
startup/marketing/entrepreneurial brand: Balsamiq/Peldi Guilizzoni (balsamiq
on HN)

"Balsamiq Roadmap for 2009" <http://www.balsamiq.com/blog/?p=539>

"A Look Back at 2008" <http://www.balsamiq.com/blog/?p=531>

"Startup Marketing Advice from Balsamiq Studio"
<http://www.balsamiq.com/blog/?p=198>

"Profitable after 3 weeks" <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=247720>

~~~
schwa23
I can't tell how serious your comment is seeing how the Balsamiq website bears
an uncanny resemblance to the 37signals website. So what you are saying is
that we shouldn't copy 37signals but we should instead learn from a guy _who
copied 37signals_?

~~~
balsamiq
Hi Schwa23, the design of balsamiq.com is mine - I have the Illustrator files
to prove it :) - but I did design it at the height of my 37Signals "fanboy"
phase, so I'm not surprised of the resemblance. I am not 100% happy with the
site and I'm working with a designer on a new look...give me a couple of
months.

~~~
betterlabs
Peldi, I think your product rocks which is what counts. I am not sure how
partly taking a homepage design from another site is a big deal and not
relevant to this conversation.

------
fp
No matter what you do and how you do it: most likely it will work for some
people and won't work for others. If you do what just works for you, that's
probably sufficient to be successful.

As merrick33 pointed out, it will not hurt to listen to people like 37signals
or Joel Spolsky and be inspired by their best ideas. Just don't blame _them_
if goes wrong for you.

------
betterlabs
Great article! All the points are right on the mark - but open to
interpretation as I can see from the comments so far. We meet a lot of
founders and I see them pointing out to Outliers all the time. Getting Real
book and stuff like that. If one could write a book to build a successful
startup or emulate Outliers, we'd all be running billion dollar companies.
There's a lot more to success than a single recipe.

Most importantly, I think you can learn from Outliers and apply but think of
your OWN WAY TO BUCK CONVENTIONAL WISDOM and do it in a way that you believe
it and are passionate about making it happen.

------
Hexstream
A related quote:

"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Seek what they sought."

~~~
kalid
Completely agree -- I had written the same thing and removed it after seeing
this.

------
tptacek
Don't cargo cult code or business plans. But if someone can solve your O(n)
problem in O(log n), do try to understand and adopt their solution.

------
sarvesh
Fogcreek has one good product and same with 37Signals, people seem to want to
be like them believing that of would help them make sucessfull products. No
matter how good a writer you are if you don't have useful products that solve
some real problems you just won't be sucessful like them. Blogging, Twitted
yeah they will help you but won't make your product an overnight sucess.

