

Review my startup... - jtregunna
http://jeremy.tregunna.ca/articles/2011-03-28/review_my_startup

======
maxhs
True. as someone who's been working on something for 6 months, and who finally
feels almost ready to post something here, I'd say: take the startups which
were obviously thrown up in the last few weeks with a grain of salt.. but
don't lump the ones which have clearly had some thought (and serious manhours)
put into them into the same bundle.

~~~
jtregunna
Agreed, it's just very hard to see quality in some of the items that get
posted. That's not to take away from the effort gone into building and
marketing them, I know it's hard work. I've failed in the startup world before
myself. Just one of those thoughts that runs through your mind sometimes.

~~~
maxhs
Yup, it might be helpful to see metrics along with every "review my startup"
post. not # customers/users, since obviously the startups that post will have
low numbers; but maybe things like manhours spent coding, number of people
involved, time since ideation, etc.

~~~
jtregunna
I'm not sure how useful those metrics would be at any point, since some ideas
are simple, and others complex. Plus how do you quantify time since you got
the idea? Just for example.

~~~
maxhs
they wouldn't be good metrics for comparing apples and oranges. you're right.
what other proxies are there for how serious/committed the founders are and/or
how well thought out the business plan? or do you just take all 'review my
startup' links with a grain of salt?

~~~
jtregunna
Due to lack of any good metrics, I always take all "Review my startup" links
with a grain of salt. I try and keep note of the ones that look interesting,
but generally after perusing the site, I forget about it. Some are downright
ridiculous, others look interesting. There's an opportunity here somewhere, I
just don't see it. :)

