“I’m in Love Idea”
In my social life, I’ve only been in love once and it didn’t work out in the end due to long distance and bad timing. In business, I’ve been in love twice. Once with TypeFrag and now a second time with Carbonmade. Just as in your social life, when you meet someone great you get this gut feeling and your stomach fills up with butterflies, the same is true when an idea clicks with you. You fall in love. Your stomach churns and you can’t sleep at night, all because you want to work on the idea so much — the equivalent being wanting to be with someone all the time.
If you’re thinking “I’m not really into you”, then you should pack away your thoughts and wait for the next idea. If you’re at all successful developing your idea then you’ll be fully involved with it for at least five to seven years. You don’t want to be invested in something that you don’t care about enough to commit to for that long. And most importantly, you won’t be able to give an idea your best work and attention if you’re not in love. Your relationship will suffer and, ultimately, die out.
Good and bad ideas are not so black and white. Spencer Fry of Carbonmade discusses how to get that “I’m in Love Idea” and execute it well.
Photo by Felipe on Flickr.
Coming up with ideas isn’t too difficult, but finding the right one can be a challenge. Even worse, following an idea that just isn’t good enough can lead to disaster. Focusing on one idea at a time can help you weed out the bad:
“Good ideas are a dime a dozen” or “execution is everything” are popular phrases entrepreneurs roll off their tongues when asked, “Do ideas matter?” While I provisionally agree with both statements, it’s just not so black and white. Both phrases are rather misleading. Ideas don’t simply materialize out of thin air, and not every idea is worth your time. As popular as it is to dismiss the thought of coming up with a good idea — you know, because it requires sitting around, thinking and suspending activity — it’s critical to focus on one idea at a time, preferably your “I’m in Love Idea.”
Without that focus, Fry suggests you’re in danger of entertaining ideas that seem good but don’t mean all that much to you. If you’re not sure—if you’re not in love with the idea—you’re better off letting it go. Whether you break up with your idea or fall madly in love with it, when considering the idea don’t let it just sit in your head. As Ze Frank points out, it’s better to let the ideas out and see what happens rather than keeping them in your head (where they’ll turn into brain crack).
But what about execution?
While execution is far from everything — despite the nice ring to the slogan — a better way to phrase it would be that an “I’m in Love Idea” isn’t going to do the work for you. Leer más ““One idea at a time. Preferably one you love.””
Written by Audrey Watters
Earlier this week, VC Mark Suster blogged the decree “Say No to Meetings.” Suster argues that time is an entrepreneur’s scarcest resource. And with all the pressures – from current and potential employees, vendors, and investors, Suster suggests that entrepreneurs learn to decline holding meetings.
This may seem somewhat contradictory to the advice that entrepreneurs always stay in touch with advisors and investors. Suster clarifies, “I’m not saying “no more meetings” but rather “no, to more meetings.”
Written by Audrey Watters
Earlier this week, VC Mark Suster blogged the decree “Say No to Meetings.” Suster argues that time is an entrepreneur‘s scarcest resource. And with all the pressures – from current and potential employees, vendors, and investors, Suster suggests that entrepreneurs learn to decline holding meetings.
This may seem somewhat contradictory to the advice that entrepreneurs always stay in touch with advisors and investors. Suster clarifies, “I’m not saying “no more meetings” but rather “no, to more meetings.” Leer más “Entrepreneurs, Say No to (Poorly Run, Unnecessary) Meetings”
By Chrissie Brodigan
It’s Wednesday, can you feel it? Well, this mid-week roundup is devoted to all things business and development oriented.
Some links are newsworthy, some retweeted across Twitter, and others just meet our “awesomeness” requirement, and regardless we hope you’ll enjoy them. Without further delay:
Wildcard: “Dear Designer, You Suck!” by Khoi Vinh
A note, reader Saquib Ali wrote a great comment regarding a link I posted about Google Doc’s new “Drawings” tool that’s worth re-posting here, he writes:
Google Drawings is awesome for collaboratively working on diagrams, flowcharts etc. And you can export these drawings to SVG as well!!! 🙂 Super cool.
However there are few key things missing in Google Drawings
– You can not import an SVG
– You can not copy a drawing (object) and paste into another Google Drawing Canvas
– Diagrams can’t be edited in IE 7/8.
– Diagram can’t be added to Docs/Presentation as editable drawing objects.
– No revision history
– No line connectors 😦
– No built-in support for Mind Maps
– Cannot get a list of diagrams via the docs API
Please shoot me links to projects your working on or awesome things you’ve released! firstname.lastname@example.org
Being a resident of the Phoenix area, which is a significant distance from Silicon Valley, I wasn’t able to attend the Demo Day show-and-tell pitch-fest at the end of Y Combinator (YC), but luckily, other reporters were there and have been slowly releasing stories about the companies and the event. Peter Kafka of All Things Digital published a video interview Thursday with YC co-founder Paul Graham from Demo Day in which he provides some interesting insights into how the investment community is rebounding and possibly how incubators are beginning to have influence on the larger VC firms.
This group of YC grads included 26 companies, of which 20-25% Graham would expect statistically to go on to receive Series A funding. However, this number could potentially be higher with this newest class as Graham has seen a drastic change in the attitudes of the investors.
“Judging by the reactions of investors, the recessions seems to be over,” Graham said in his interview with Kafka. “I don’t think we’ve ever had a batch that had so much investor interest so early as this one.”
As Graham points out, some of the companies had spoken with or secured angel funding well before demo day – another surprise, he says. An interesting opinion he shared in his interview included the idea that it is hard to place a statistical number on how many companies emerge from YC to become “successful” businesses. Who defines what “successful” is?
Graham says that historically, 70% of YC companies have raised additional funding since leaving the program, or have not needed to because they managed to become profitable without additional help. But how does Graham truly gauge success for the entrepreneurs? “The founders end up rich, basically. That’s the definition,” he says.
The other interesting quote Graham gave during his brief interview sparked an interesting thought in my mind about the state of the start-up and investment community as a whole. When Kafka suggested that angel investors tend to get squeezed how by more powerful VC firms that flood companies with cash in future rounds of funding, Graham replied that firms would be foolish to attempt this with YC startups. To paraphrase, Graham basically said, “The firms wouldn’t dare squeeze out the angels on YC companies because that would mean they would be squeezing us too, and that wouldn’t be wise if they wanted to continue to have access to our alumni.”
What this got me thinking about is how the growing popularity of incubator programs like Y Combinator and TechStars is affecting the venture capital community. Are firms less likely to squeeze out angel investors from these kinds of companies because the incubators continually graduate companies with high potential? Is Graham saying that if the VCs want continued access to the best startups around that they had better play nice with the angels?
If so, is this good or bad for the startup community? If this is really having a significant impact on how VC firms approach these companies, then it surely benefits the angel investors, but do the startups ultimately gain anything from it? I wonder if there has been a case of VC firms deciding not to invest in a YC company because they would rather be able to have more control over term negotiations.
I would think that a VC firm would be more interested in the opportunity to work with high-potential companies than in a power struggle in the board room, but I could be wrong. Or I could just be over analyzing a simple quote.
Photo by Flickr user pragdave.