Loading...
Answers
MenuIs it ok to use pre-existing services to build a startup on?
Do I need to re-invent the wheel and have all the cost or is it ok to buy a pre-existing platform - like a white label classifieds app - and then customise it to fit my classified app needs?
Answers
Everyone does this.
For example, take the entire LAMP ecosystem.
You could write your own Linux + Apache + MariaDB + PHP + OpenSSL + WordPress...
Or you can just use these, as they currently exist.
Same applies to ideas.
Dan Kennedy is found of saying, "Pioneers come back riddled with arrows..."
In other words, doing anything new is likely to fail.
Better to take something... anything... already working... put your own spin on it... then go after part of an already existing market.
As for your specific project, you've provided to little detail... to provide any in depth advice...
Since your project is Tech based, likely good to bring on board someone to serve first as a Fractional CTO (Tech)... then after your tech is working... change over to a CMO (Marketing)...
Yes, it is absolutely fine to use pre-existing services as long as it matches the list of your requirements and you make sure that the service doesn't violate any of the terms and conditions.
The reason this is acceptable is because they are already built and the structure of the service is already established. The only thing you need to do is adapt your use case to fit your business needs.
For classified, there are many wordpress themes and PHP scripts available market that can be used readily. For more information we can discuss this over a call - so I can give you maximum value for your money. Take a look at the great reviews I’ve received: https://clarity.fm/ripul.chhabra
Hi
Unless you're doing something really unique (and even then...) it is actually advised that you start with something that already exists in order to first test the market and see that your idea/business is indeed feasible. Once you've validated your idea, you can spend money (if need be) on creating something tailor made.
By testing a simple platform first, you will learn a lot about the market, the users, what things you should do different etc....
I am a mentor on Startups.com, a lecturer, and a startup lawyer. I've successfully helped over 400 entrepreneurs, startups and businesses and I would be happy to help you. After scheduling a call, please send me some background information and the 2 main questions you want answered so that I can prepare in advance (to give you maximum value for your money). My reviews: https://clarity.fm/assafben-david
Please please please, use what's already available.
I'll give you an example, we use https://spark.laravel.com for billing, https://signaturegenerator.co to generate signatures, https://solidframework.net to convert documents, and probably a dozen other software solutions to create ours.
There's no where that says you need to use 100% proprietary code. Usually, this is done when you can't find anything opensource to tweak or if what's available is too expensive for your budget.
If there's an option, 9/10 startups stand on the shoulders of giants by using what's available. This is especially true if the market hasn't been validated in any meaningful way.
Related Questions
-
For every success story in Silicon Valley, how many are there that fail?
It all depends on what one decides to be a definition of a "success story." For some entrepreneurs, it might be getting acqui-hired, for some -- a $10M exit, for some -- a $200M exit, and for others -- an IPO. Based on the numbers I have anecdotally heard in conversations over the last decade or so, VCs fund about 1 in 350 ventures they see, and of all of these funded ventures, only about 1 in 10 become really successful (i.e. have a big exit or a successful IPO.) So you are looking at a 1 in 3500 chance of eventual venture success among all of the companies that try to get VC funding. (To put this number in perspective, US VCs invest in about 3000-3500 companies every year.) In addition, there might be a few others (say, maybe another 1-2 in every 10 companies that get VC investments) that get "decent" exits along the way, and hence could be categorized as somewhat successful depending on, again, how one chooses to define what qualifies as a "success story." Finally, there might also be companies that may never need or get around to seeking VC funding. One can, of course, find holes in the simplifying assumptions I have made here, but it doesn't really matter if that number instead is 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10000. The basic point being made here is just that the odds are heavily stacked against new ventures being successful. But that's also one of the distinguishing characteristics of entrepreneurs -- to go ahead and try to bring their idea to life despite the heavy odds. Sources of some of the numbers: http://www.nvca.org/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ven... https://www.pwcmoneytree.com/MTP... http://paulgraham.com/future.html Here are others' calculations of the odds that lead to a similar conclusion: 1.Dear Entrepreneurs: Here's How Bad Your Odds Of Success Are http://www.businessinsider.com/startup-odds-of-success-2013-5 2.Why 99.997% Of Entrepreneurs May Want To Postpone Or Avoid VC -- Even If You Can Get It http://www.forbes.com/sites/dileeprao/2013/07/29/why-99-997-of-entrepreneurs-may-want-to-postpone-or-avoid-vc-even-if-you-can-get-it/MB
-
What is a better title for a startup head....Founder or CEO? Are there any pros/cons to certain titles?
The previous answers given here are great, but I've copied a trick from legendary investor Monish Pabrai that I've used in previous startups that seems to work wonders -- especially if your company does direct B2B sales. Many Founders/ CEOs are hung up on having the Founder/ CEO/ President title. As others have mentioned, those titles have become somewhat devalued in today's world -- especially if you are in a sales meeting with a large organization. Many purchasing agents at large organizations are bombarded by Founders/ CEOs/ Presidents visiting them all day. This conveys the image that a) your company is relatively small (the CEO of GM never personally sells you a car) and b) you are probably the most knowledgeable person in the organization about your product, but once you land the account the client company will mostly be dealing with newly hired second level staff. Monish recommends that Founder/ CEOs hand out a business card that has the title "Head of Sales" or "VP of Sales". By working in the Head of Sales role, and by your ability to speak knowledgeably about the product, you will convey the message that a) every person in the organization is very knowledgeable about the ins and outs of the product (even the sales guys) and b) you will personally be available to answer the client's questions over the long run. I've used this effectively many times myself.VR
-
How much equity should I ask as a C-level executive in a new startup ?
As you may suspect, there really isn't a hard and fast answer. You can review averages to see that a CEO typically becomes a major shareholder in a startup, but your role and renumeration will be based on the perceived value you bring to the organization. You value someone's contribution through equity when you think that they will be able to add long-term benefits, you would prefer that they don't move company part way through the process, and to keep them from being enticed by a better salary (a reason for equity tied to a vesting arrangement). Another reason is when the company doesn't have salary money available but the potential is very strong. In this situation you should be especially diligent in your analysis because you will realize that even the best laid plans sometimes fall completely short. So to get the best mix, you have to be very real about the company's long-term growth potential, your role in achieving it, and the current liquidity necessary to run the operations. It should also be realized that equity needs to be distributed. You cannot distribute 110% and having your cap table recalculated such that your 5% turns into 1% in order to make room for the newly hired head of technology is rather demotivating for the team. Equity should be used to entice a valuable person to join, stay, and contribute. It should not be used in leu of salary that allows an employee to pay their bills. So, like a lot of questions, the answer is really, it depends. Analyzing the true picture of your long-term potential will allow you to more easily determine the correct mix.DH
-
What is the best platform to create a member based CMS website? (e.g. Squarespace)
Most of my friends use www.wordpress.org and http://member.wishlistproducts.com/ to create their membership sites. Hope that helps.DM
-
VCs: What are some pitch deck pet peeves?
Avoid buzzwords: - every founder thinks their idea is disruptive/revolutionary - every founder says their financial projections are conservative Instead: - explain your validation & customer traction - explain the assumptions underlying your projections Avoid: - focusing extensively on the product/technology rather than on the business - misunderstanding the purpose of financial projections; they exist in a pitch deck to: a) validate the founders understanding of running a business b) provide a sense of magnitude of the opportunity versus the amount of capital requested c) confirm the go-to-market strategy (nothing undermines a pitch faster than financial projections disconnected from the declared go-to-market approach) d) generally discredit you as someone who understands how to build a company; for instance we'll capture 10% of our market, 1% of China, etc. Top down financial projections get big laughs from investors after you leave the room. bonus) don't show 90% profit margins. Ever. Even if you'll actually have them. Ever. Instead: - avoid false precision by rounding all projections to nearest thousands ($000) - include # units / # subscribers / # customers above revenue line; this goes hand-in-hand with building a bottom up revenue model and implicitly reveals assumptions. Investors will determine if you are realistic, conservative, or out of your mind based largely on the customer acquisition numbers and your explanation of how they will be achieved. - highlight your assumptions & milestones on first customers, cash flow break even, and other customer acquisition and expense metrics that are relevant Avoid: - thinking about investor money as your money - approaching the pitch from your mindset (I need money); investors have to be skeptics, so understand their perspective. - bad investors; it's tempting to think that any money is good money. You can't get an investor to leave once they are in without Herculean efforts and costs (and if you're asking for money, you can't afford it). If you're not on the same page with an investor on how to run/grow the business, you'll regret every waking hour. Instead: - it's their money; tell them how you are going to utilize their money to make them more money - you're a founder, a true believer. Your mantra should be "de-risk, de-risk, de-risk". Perception of risk is the #1 reason an investor says no. Many are legitimate, but often enough it's simply a perception that could have been addressed. - beyond the pitch, make the conversation 2-way. Ask questions of the investor (you might learn awesome things or uncover problems) and talk to at least two other founders they invested in more than 6 months ago.JP
the startups.com platform
Copyright © 2025 Startups.com. All rights reserved.