

Why 37signals’ advice is irrelevant - joshfraser
http://iwasamonkey.tumblr.com/post/872202764/why-37signals-advice-is-irrelevant

======
vgurgov
Cmn, I usually hate doing such type of comments but here i just have to say:

Who the F is "Mr Daniel Leary"?? I think "Mr Daniel Leary" "is irrelevant".
Why? Lets compare:

37signals gave me tools that: 1) I am using myself sometimes 2) My friends and
clients are using and enjoying day by day. They are willing to pay $$ for it
as it get needed things done.

37s doing just fine as a company employing these business methods

I learned A LOT from 37s books, talks, blogs etc. I talked with DHH few times
at Rails events and personally think that he is a very clever guy. I usually
enjoy Jason's posts as well

I made a lot of money for my self and my business using tools(like Rails) and
methods that 37 signals gave me. I can say that THANKS TO 37SIGNALS ABOUT 10
PEOPLE HAVE JOBS AND GETTING PAID EVERY DAY IN MY COMPANY ALONE. This wouldn't
exist without them!

Now Daniel. Maybe I am missing something about his biography but who the F is
he to tell me what is relevant? What kind of expert is he??

"Let me say from the outset that I have a degree in economics. I studied this
at Oxford University, and have as good a grasp as anyone. " Is it that guy
<http://uk.linkedin.com/in/danielleary> ?? If so, then I can understand why
this Oxford student explaining why some established business model that i and
many other businesses successfully employ "is irrelevant" sounds so stupid and
funny to me.

Sorry again for getting it so personal, but i believe that most of the HN
folks can see why his points are irrelevant so there is no need to explain
this here.

~~~
rianjs
You didn't address the substance of the argument, therefore I can only
conclude that you didn't read more than the first few paragraphs. The article
is quite detailed, and plainly states that it's not a indictment of 37s the
company, their products, or their business model. Instead, it explains why
their business advice doesn't apply to most startups. It goes on to talk about
pricing theory as it relates to one specific sector (software) and sectors
within software (e.g. social startups vs a value-add, business startup).
Pricing is not a solved problem, nor is it straightforward, and the article
acknowledges this fact, and elaborates on it.

As you didn't address _any_ of this, I can only conclude that your post is a
knee-jerk defense of a company you like which relies on an ad hominem attack
in an attempt to discredit the author, rather than making any useful arguments
yourself.

