Pick a niche market. A market that you don't have to create and a market that is already lucrative. At this point you are not building a product to test a market/theory because it already exist, and proven. Then build something that's better than what's out there and compete on features/pricing because you can obviously build products fast and this can give you an edge.
Personally, as much as I like building products for consumers I learnt (the hard way) to avoid them (for now) because they will most likely fail for reasons like: audience is hard to reach, requires viral-lity most of the time for people to hear about it and use it, and requires a very well polished UI. Not to mention that they whine and expect things to be free. :)
Before you create a product, answer these two questions accurately: 1. How will I reach my audience? 2. Am I solving a real problem? (don't kid yourself)
But how would one compete with already established competitors when it comes to domain knowledge? I mean... picking up a niche market may be easy, but then you must know it better than those who are already there.
You have to pick a niche that you think your knowledge in this domain is an advantage over the current competitors or allows you to compete at the same level. Don't think you'll ever enter a market where you'll be on your own with no competitors and everyone is paying you. That won't happen. If this happened then you are creating a market and soon after you'll have competitors.
Don't be afraid of competition. Competition is at the core of running a business.
That is the kind of thing I would like to see in case studies. I always see articles about starting the next facebook or something, the 'sexy' startups. But when it comes to building stuff to niche markets like, say, agriculture or logistics, theres not much said.
I'm actually trying to find something for myself, though acquiring the domain knowledge is something the puzzles me. How do one gets, as was suggested, immersed on a given field, knowing that no one will pay you just to learn.
I studied computer science, but this just teaches one how to use technology to build stuff. Now I'm on the weird position of not knowing what to build :D
People often pay you to learn, but that's not the point. To answer the question you posed in the earlier post about domain knowledge: you focus smaller and smaller until you find something where you can become an expert in a reasonable time.
e.g., "agriculture" is not a niche. Breeding management software for Silver-laced Wyandottes is a niche. You reduce the huge term "agriculture" by going agriculture->poultry->poultry husbandry->poultry breeding->breeding-chickens->breeding-Silvery-laced-Wyandottes.
Now, is there a market for that product I picked out of the air? I don't know, but I suspect, based on my knowledge of the field, that there could very well be. And you could own it if you wanted to.
So it is not really a practical option, considering that you need to make money and the process of entering a new market just to learn may take several years, until you learn enough to build anything close to already established competitors.
edit: unless the competitors suck really bad, of course.
I have a lawn sprayer. Like most of them, it's manually controlled. Big agricultural sprayers have a huge range of automation. I want automatic control of my sprayer, so in the process of building one for myself, I'm becoming knowledgeable in the field: it just takes a few weeks. Eventually, I'll have something that scratched my itch and I can look around and see how many people have the same itch and sell it to them if it's worthwhile.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say you're either in school or haven't been out very long. It's truly amazing how little research goes into most products put on the market.
I've spent some time working on jobs as a programmer, but the companies weren't all that great... to be honest, I had the chance to take a somewhat close look at the infrastructure of one of the largest retailers from Brazil, who happened to be one of our clients, and it was scary how it was so poorly designed and implemented - it was something like a tower of babel, there was lots of third-party workers and no one was really responsible for anything.
Now I'm trying to do a PhD on security for distributed systems, though I'm having trouble to find it inspiring. I have a recurring feeling that this is not for me, but when I think about quiting it to start something for myself I have trouble thinking what could be usefull for other people, for those who use it as a tool and not as a research object. It's a bit frustrating :)
Not to put words in your mouth, but it sounds like you're doing your PhD because you can't think of anything better to do. That doesn't exactly seem like a recipe for happiness.
Indeed, I'm almost convinced of this. My advisor invited me to work with him then I got excited by the idea of doing something more complex than what I was doing. I wasn't really thrilled by getting into school again, but I guess it was good to my ego :P
A year passed and the freshness faded away. Now I'm struggling to get things done because I really don't see a point in what I am doing.
I don't know if I'm going to drop out yet, but if I do it won't take long to happen.
Well, at worst I guess I'm learning what not to do :)
Disagree. I studied civil engineering and have been in it for five years and am presently building software that accomplishes the OP's goals (so far in theory).
The same advice holds for a writer of nonfiction. Don't study writing, study another field so you actually have something to write about.
Agree with this, except maybe the bit about competing on pricing. I think it risks becoming a race to the bottom which benefits none of the competitors. Better to compete on features (as you suggest), quality, service, even messaging/style which may appeal to a particularly under-served segment of the niche.
Comments
Here's my suggestion.
Pick a niche market. A market that you don't have to create and a market that is already lucrative. At this point you are not building a product to test a market/theory because it already exist, and proven. Then build something that's better than what's out there and compete on features/pricing because you can obviously build products fast and this can give you an edge.
Personally, as much as I like building products for consumers I learnt (the hard way) to avoid them (for now) because they will most likely fail for reasons like: audience is hard to reach, requires viral-lity most of the time for people to hear about it and use it, and requires a very well polished UI. Not to mention that they whine and expect things to be free. :)
Before you create a product, answer these two questions accurately: 1. How will I reach my audience? 2. Am I solving a real problem? (don't kid yourself)
But how would one compete with already established competitors when it comes to domain knowledge? I mean... picking up a niche market may be easy, but then you must know it better than those who are already there.
You have to pick a niche that you think your knowledge in this domain is an advantage over the current competitors or allows you to compete at the same level. Don't think you'll ever enter a market where you'll be on your own with no competitors and everyone is paying you. That won't happen. If this happened then you are creating a market and soon after you'll have competitors.
Don't be afraid of competition. Competition is at the core of running a business.
That is the kind of thing I would like to see in case studies. I always see articles about starting the next facebook or something, the 'sexy' startups. But when it comes to building stuff to niche markets like, say, agriculture or logistics, theres not much said.
I'm actually trying to find something for myself, though acquiring the domain knowledge is something the puzzles me. How do one gets, as was suggested, immersed on a given field, knowing that no one will pay you just to learn.
I studied computer science, but this just teaches one how to use technology to build stuff. Now I'm on the weird position of not knowing what to build :D
People often pay you to learn, but that's not the point. To answer the question you posed in the earlier post about domain knowledge: you focus smaller and smaller until you find something where you can become an expert in a reasonable time.
e.g., "agriculture" is not a niche. Breeding management software for Silver-laced Wyandottes is a niche. You reduce the huge term "agriculture" by going agriculture->poultry->poultry husbandry->poultry breeding->breeding-chickens->breeding-Silvery-laced-Wyandottes.
Now, is there a market for that product I picked out of the air? I don't know, but I suspect, based on my knowledge of the field, that there could very well be. And you could own it if you wanted to.
thanks for the explanation, I liked your example :)
One learns a niche by immersing oneself in it.
So it is not really a practical option, considering that you need to make money and the process of entering a new market just to learn may take several years, until you learn enough to build anything close to already established competitors.
edit: unless the competitors suck really bad, of course.
Nope.
I have a lawn sprayer. Like most of them, it's manually controlled. Big agricultural sprayers have a huge range of automation. I want automatic control of my sprayer, so in the process of building one for myself, I'm becoming knowledgeable in the field: it just takes a few weeks. Eventually, I'll have something that scratched my itch and I can look around and see how many people have the same itch and sell it to them if it's worthwhile.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say you're either in school or haven't been out very long. It's truly amazing how little research goes into most products put on the market.
I've spent some time working on jobs as a programmer, but the companies weren't all that great... to be honest, I had the chance to take a somewhat close look at the infrastructure of one of the largest retailers from Brazil, who happened to be one of our clients, and it was scary how it was so poorly designed and implemented - it was something like a tower of babel, there was lots of third-party workers and no one was really responsible for anything.
Now I'm trying to do a PhD on security for distributed systems, though I'm having trouble to find it inspiring. I have a recurring feeling that this is not for me, but when I think about quiting it to start something for myself I have trouble thinking what could be usefull for other people, for those who use it as a tool and not as a research object. It's a bit frustrating :)
Not to put words in your mouth, but it sounds like you're doing your PhD because you can't think of anything better to do. That doesn't exactly seem like a recipe for happiness.
Indeed, I'm almost convinced of this. My advisor invited me to work with him then I got excited by the idea of doing something more complex than what I was doing. I wasn't really thrilled by getting into school again, but I guess it was good to my ego :P
A year passed and the freshness faded away. Now I'm struggling to get things done because I really don't see a point in what I am doing. I don't know if I'm going to drop out yet, but if I do it won't take long to happen.
Well, at worst I guess I'm learning what not to do :)
Disagree. I studied civil engineering and have been in it for five years and am presently building software that accomplishes the OP's goals (so far in theory).
The same advice holds for a writer of nonfiction. Don't study writing, study another field so you actually have something to write about.
Agree with this, except maybe the bit about competing on pricing. I think it risks becoming a race to the bottom which benefits none of the competitors. Better to compete on features (as you suggest), quality, service, even messaging/style which may appeal to a particularly under-served segment of the niche.
Agreed. I didn't imply to burn the price but if you can operate at a lower cost then reflecting that in the prices can bring along more customers.