

Yogi Berra wisdom for startups - jkopelman
http://redeye.firstround.com/2009/03/pivoting-and-yogi-berra.html

======
nopinsight
Point taken.

However, the situation today is quite unlike the day when Google was born.
Back then, most search results were almost a collection of random links with
keywords on them. Then Google found a fairly simple new approach, Web-link
analysis (PageRank), that totally outperforms the keyword-based approach. And
Google was the first to exploit this approach on a large scale. (Yes, there
were other researchers who discovered a similar approach based on Web links
and also outperformed all those other large search engines at the time. But
they didn't commercialize the work well enough.)

Now, there is little chance that such a low-hanging fruit is still left
undiscovered. To improve search further, it's likely that you need to either
or both of the followings:

1) bring in additional information, like user personal preferences. (Google is
doing this with their personalized search.)

2) deal with very complex issues like natural language processing (e.g.
reading the Web like humans do), semantic Web, inference with ambiguous chain
of evidence, other advanced AI issues. (Google probably bought the whole of
Powerset just to help make this problem a little more tractable.) (Chacha.com
sidesteps the issue by using real humans to do the work.)

I'd say unless you're a real genius and has been studying NLP & AI for a long
time, it's extremely unlikely you'd beat all the AI experts at Google. Since
AI & NLP are inherently complex stuff, no single paper or invention is likely
to break a total new ground as in Physics (think Einstein's Special
Relativity).

Sorry to disappoint, but there are certain product areas where likely
improvements will be just incremental. We'd better choose our terrain well.
Justin.TV didn't compete directly with Youtube for this reason.

That's why, as a startup, you don't really want to compete with Gillette in
shavers or Intel in PC microprocessors (or Hacker News in news for hackers,
for that matter) by out-inventing them. We'd have a much better chance by
finding a whole new ball game to play.

------
10ren
Google's position is very tenuous, because it's very easy for users to switch
search engines. Which is one reason Google works so very hard at the
competitive advantages it _can_ build, such as PR, patents, tools (gmail,
docs, maps), and improving search.

All you need is better search. Is that possible? Google would like you to
leave that research to them, with all their money, experience and PhD's,
what's the point in trying? Surely there are better prospects anywhere but
there? _This_ is one of Google's competitive advantages. (of course, if you
_did_ invent better search, they would immediately buy you).

~~~
spolsky
I keep hearing this meme that "it's very easy for users to switch search
engines."

This is true for one user. But BILLIONS of people are using Google. And it's
NOT easy for all of them to switch. Google's position is not tenuous at all.

~~~
10ren
The barrier of switching costs is not a "meme", it's one of the bases of
competitive advantage as I'm sure you know. I think there's a much stronger
counter-argument in articulating the other competitive advantages that google
works on. Market-share just gives you a buffer.

It would take some time for billions to switch, yes; but if there was a search
engine that was far superior for what users need, the difficulty of switching
would not prevent them. It's the standard pattern of technology adoption.

People get attached to consumer goods (e.g. brands of washing powder, chewing
gum), but while they also get attached to technology, it doesn't seem to do
the technology much good once it has been superseded (DEC anyone?)

The lack of a "far superior search engine" is the significant barrier, IMHO.
And whether such a technology is possible is something I don't claim to know.
That's the unpredictable nature of technology/science, and why people like
Warren Buffett won't invest in it.

------
hajrice
Oh WOW! This story really encourages me. I love the fact that Google actually
came late, very tenuous of them. Google had their own search engine, they
wanted to be unique. I think that this is pretty much why they had no fear of
launching a but 'late'.

------
robg
Yogi would make a great adviser to any startup. Just stick him in board
meetings and listen when he speaks.

Great post.

