Loading...
Answers
MenuIs it viable to validate and fund my project at the same time?
Answers
Hi there - great question(s).
You "can" validate and fund projects at the same time. In fact, at some point the critical part of true validation is showing that quantitatively someone will pay something for your product/services. Now, whether you should fund while validating is the more important question. A lot of entrepreneurs look at the payment component as as round 2 or 3 validation point, and instead start with a tacit validation exercise, focusing less on business model (how much will someone pay for this and how will they pay?) and more on showing a consumer need/ability to target that market with your proposed solution.
In the example you use, if you do commence with taking pre-orders but ultimately the project falls through, you would and should be most inclined to fully refund their money (and stating that on the landing page could do wonders for your adoption of people pre-registering.) the reality is, unless you are showing a sample product or touting something that people can easily comprehend, the chances of you getting a volume of people (outside of your own network) to pre-order something from a brand new company might be on the slim side.
But let's say you do get people to sign up - the challenge is that you are using their cash to fund ongoing operations. So if the project falters or goes belly-up, the chances of you having all or even some of everyone's money might be slim. So this would be a reason to advocate potentially against using pre-orders (and collecting payments for them) to fund ongoing operations. A savvy buyer will note this too and may seek to avoid that risk altogether.
I could think of several ways you could fund ongoing operation with your product/early beta, but it really depends on 1) the product you're launching, 2) what your target buyers are, 3) your operational costs and 4) your goal of the beta/validation stages. It requires a bit of guidance and dialogue, but there are several options you should be able to choose from for funding, and if one of those is using pre-orders or the validation phase to generate funds, there are things you should strongly consider to protect yourself and your consumers.
Happy to hop on a call and discuss your idea and options further. Just follow the link and request a call!
For any fund-raising process, traction is the key. Since you are validating and cannot really talk about traction (so far), the next important factor is projections.
The way you prepare projections can be critical to raise funds in your case. If you need any any email in your pitch deck, you can setup a call with me! :)
Cheers, and good luck!
I've seen two companies with mid-seven figures funding, one of which I co-founded, fail first-hand. Neither of these companies validated the idea prior to building it. Based on these two experiences I'm a huge proponent of validating first, building second.
I think there are two common pitfalls that people with an idea fall into, when they choose to build first, validate second -
1 - If I think it's a great idea, there must be a lot of other people who do too.
I think this pitfall is caused mainly by the optimism that is naturally inherent in entrepreneurs. I personally have no shortage of ideas, most of which I believe are good ones :)
I took a course by Noah Kagan of AppSumo, where he suggests finding three paying customers, prior to building a product. When I started validating my ideas this way, prior to launching, I was surprised at how quickly I learned the lesson that just because I thought an idea was a great one, that didn't mean anyone else did.
2 - Building is more fun/satisfying than validating
When we're building something, we experience tangible progress and feel like we're exerting some degree of control over our future. Both of these experiences work powerfully on our conscious and sub-conscious mind.
As a result, it's easy to get pulled into a project, get enticed and distracted by the momentum that seems to building as we're making "progress", only to release the product to the market and have it fall flat due to lack of demand.
So, if it isn't clear by this point, my strong suggestion is to validate first, build second :) I think the good news is that the availability of crowdfunding platforms, landing page builders, etc., makes this approach easier than ever before.
You may also be surprised at how much work goes into validating your project, so you may still experience the satisfaction of feeling like you're making progress, if your idea begins to gain traction and/or you begin to interact and communicate with potential customers.
Good luck and always happy to discuss further on a call!
Related Questions
-
What is the best way to find full stack mobile developers who are willing to work with me for equity, and what is fair compensation?
It's highly unlikely that you will be able to find competent full-stack mobile developers willing to work with you for equity, but if you do, "fair" compensation would be 50% or more of the equity in the Company. Approaching any developer with just an idea, diminishes your credibility as a potential co-founder. Here's why: If you're non-technical, you must show a "relentless resourcefulness" in moving your idea forward. This means finding the money necessary to get an MVP or even click-able prototype completed to show that while you might not be technical, you have the ability to raise money, and have enough product sense that you can articulate that into a prototype. If you can't raise or spend the relatively small amount of money required to successfully build a prototype, what evidence are you providing that developer that you are going to be able to create value for the business long-term? Full-stack mobile developers (although this is often quite a misnomer) are one of the most in-demand skill-sets of all Silicon Valley companies. That means that you're competing against established companies that can pay top dollar, and still provide meaningful equity incentives as well as recently funded startups who have further along the road in turning their idea into reality. I would suggest that you look at hiring contractors (I know of some great mobile dev shops that are reasonable) to build your first version. Expect to go solo at least until you have some form of early prototype. Then, you're in a much better position to attract a technical co-founder. Happy to talk you through any of this at any point.TW
-
How do I approach potential clients to give me feedback on my product?
Hi, I've worked for years in business to business sales and consulting. You need to find out who works or makes decisions in a company in the area that your potential product could be useful, ie customer service. LinkedIn could be useful for this. Call them on the telephone. Don't e-mail. Open the conversation by asking for help, 'Hi, I'm wondering if you could help me find the person who would be responsible for customer service? I'm looking to get feedback on an innovative new idea I'm considering developing that may be useful to your company.' The most important thing you could ask them during the call is whether they've ever identified the problem that you're proposing to solve as an issue themselves. If they've never noticed, or don't care, then your new product will have a more challenging sales cycle since you'll have to do a lot of education. If they already know they have a problem, you'll need to act quickly because they may be already looking for a solution. Best of luck. David BarnettDC
-
What product should I build?
You can only solve a big problem that changes the world if you solve a problem that is deeply personal to you. Two great examples and why they worked: Roy Raymond was a sad pervert. He'd buy bras and panties at the department store and all the clerks thought their thoughts about him. Roy felt embarrassed. He wasn't really a pervert. He just wanted to buy lingerie for his girlfriend. So he solved this major problem he was having. He created a space where men could feel comfortable coming in and buying sexy lingerie for their partners. He called it Victoria's Secret. But Roy, by solving this important personal issue for himself, apparently solved the same issue for many other men. First year sales were over $500,000 and he quickly opened up three more stores. In 1982 he sold Victoria's Secret for one million dollars before trying multiple other businesses that ended up failing. One MILLION Dollars. A decade later Victoria's Secret was worth over a billion dollars but Roy Raymund was nearly bankrupt and had missed the huge run-up in it's value. -- Picture New York City in the late 1800s on a rainy day. It was disgusting beyond belief. 150,000 horses transported people up and down the busy streets. Each of those horses, according to Super Freakonomics, dropped down about 15-30 pounds of manure. That's up to 4.5 million pounds of manure A DAY on the streets of NYC. And now imagine it raining. Would you cross the street? How long could this last? How long would the city survive without being infested with crap and all the diseases brought with it. What would happen as population of both men and horses increased? Was someone working on inventing a gigantic manure scooper? How would this problem get solved? It never got solved. Instead, Henry Ford invented the assembly line to mass produce cars. Every horse lost their job. People began to drive cars. Manure problem solved. -- In both cases there is a common theme. Someone outside the industry solved a problem that was personal to them that then changed an industry forever. Roy Raymund wasn't a fashion designer or a retailer. He worked in the marketing department of Vicks, which makes over the counter medications. Henry Ford, I don't think, ever worked in the manure industry. Instead, each person focused on a problem that was important to them. A problem that excited them at that moment in time. Raymund wanted to avoid being embarrassed in the future. Ford wanted an efficient way to make cars. The ONLY way to change the world is to solve a problem that is important to YOU. They had to choose themselves for success before they could save the world. Raymund had to convince himself that he didn't belong in the marketing department of a division of Procter & Gamble. He borrowed $80,000 and took the big risk of starting a business. Ford had to survive numerous failures and bankruptcies in order to find a cheap way to make cars. He would abandon investors, people who supported him, and even companies named after him, in his quest to solve his problem in his own way. Nobody gave them permission. And neither of them set out to change the world. They only wanted to solve a problem that was personally important to them. It's unfortunate that often we forget that choosing ourselves is not something that happens once. It has to happen every single day. Else we lose track of that core inside of us that solves problems and is able to share them in a way that makes the world a better place. Ford forgot this and became obsessed with Jews. Ford is the only American that Hitler mentions in Mein Kampf: "only a single great man, Ford, [who], to [the Jews'] fury, still maintains full independence...[from] the controlling masters of the producers in a nation of one hundred and twenty millions." And what happened to our embarrassed marketing manager that has ignited the passions of men and women for the past 30 years? Roy Raymund saw the value of Victoria's Secret jump from the one million he sold it for in 1982 to over a billion dollars a decade later. He failed in business after business. He got divorced. Then at the age of 46, my age, he drove to Golden Gate Bridge, jumped off it and killed himself. Before you can save the world you have to save yourself. But you have to relentlessly do it every day. Sometimes the train wakes me up at night and I feel scared. What will the world be like for my children? I won't always be able to help them. I don't even know if I do enough to help them now. And then I remember. I'm alive for another day.JA
-
What is the best method for presenting minimum viable products to potential customers?
Whoa, start by reading the Lean book again; you're questions suggest you are making a classical mistake made by too many entrepreneurs who live and breath Lean Startup. An MVP is not the least you can show someone to evaluate whether or not building it is a good idea; an MVP is, by it's very definition, the Minimum Viable Product - not less than that. What is the minimum viable version of a professional collaboration network in which users create a professional profile visible to others? A website on which users can register, have a profile, and in some way collaborate with others: via QA, chat, content, etc. No? A minimum viable product is used not to validate if something is a good idea but that you can make it work; that you can acquire users through the means you think viable, you can monetize the business, and that you can learn from the users' experience and optimize that experience by improving the MVP. Now, that doesn't mean you just go build your MVP. I get the point of your question, but we should distinguish where you're at in the business and if you're ready for an MVP or you need to have more conversations with potential users. Worth noting, MOST entrepreneurs are ready to go right to an MVP. It's a bit of a misleading convention to think that entrepreneurs don't have a clue about the industry in which they work and what customers want; that is to say, you shouldn't be an entrepreneur trying to create this professional collaboration network if you don't know the market, have done some homework, talked to peers and friends, have some experience, etc. and already know that people DO want such a thing. Presuming you've done that, what would you present to potential users BEFORE actually building the MVP? For what do you need nothing more than some slides? It's not a trick question, you should show potential users slides and validate that what you intend to build is the best it can be. I call it "coffee shop testing" - build a slide of the homepage and the main screen used by registered users; sit in a coffee shop, and buy coffee for anyone who will give you 15 minutes. Show them the two slides and listen; don't explain, ONLY ask.... - For what is this a website? - Would you sign up for it? Why? - Would you tell your friends? Why? - What would you pay for it? Don't explain ANYTHING. If you have to explain something, verbally, you aren't ready to build your MVP - potential customers don't get it. Keep working with that slide alone until you get enough people who say they will sign up and know, roughly, what people will pay. THEN build your MVP and introduce it first to friends, family, peers, etc. to get your earliest adopters. At some point you're going to explore investors. There is no "ready" as the reaction from investors will entirely depend on who you're talking to, why, how much you need, etc. If you want to talk to investors with only the slides as you need capital to build the MVP, your investors are going to be banks, grants, crowdfunding, incubators, and MAYBE angels (banks are investors?! of course they are, don't think that startups only get money from people with cash to give you for equity). Know that it's VERY hard to raise money at this stage; why would I invest in your idea when all you've done is validate that people probably want it - you haven't built anything. A bank will give you a loan to do that, not many investors will take the risk. Still, know not that your MVP is "ready" but that at THAT stage, you have certain sources of capital with which you could have a conversation. When you build the MVP, those choices change. Now that you have something, don't talk to a bank, but a grant might still be viable. Certainly: angels, crowdfunding, accelerators, and maybe even VCs become interested. The extent to which they are depends on the traction you have relative to THEIR expectations - VCs are likely to want some significant adoption or revenue whereas Angels should be excited for your early adoption and validation and interested in helping you scale.PO
-
How do you get a product prototype developed in China sitting in the US?
It varies and it's very very specific to what you want to develop. The concrete design of your circuit matters. Also prototype building costs are usually a factor 10-100 higher than series. If you already have your prototype then you can shop around various manufacturing companies. To do that, you need Gerber files (your PCB design) and a bill of materials. You also need to think about casing: designing it and creating the mold is expensive. If you don't have your prototype yet, I recommend having it engineered in eastern Europe. Custom engineering is cheap there and high quality. IP protection is a problem. One thing to do is to distribute the work to different manufacturers. For the design phase you are safer if you design your prototype in Europe or the US where international patent laws apply. I could give you more specific advise in a phone call, getting to know a bit better what you are trying to build.GF
the startups.com platform
Copyright © 2025 Startups.com. All rights reserved.