Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This is academic gobbledy gook. I felt like I was hearing a bad tech sales pitch flipping through this with all of its markitecture diagrams.

Beware - just because something comes from Stanford, doesn't make it meaningful or insightful. This is just restating common knowledge with flow charts.




This is based on Steve Blank's experience as a serial entrepreneur: he graduated from the school of hard knocks and is not given to academic gobbledygook.

This presentation is condensed from his book "Four Steps to the Epiphany" which is well worth reading. Eric Ries has written a good post that marries this methodology with agile at http://startuplessonslearned.blogspot.com/2008/09/customer-d...


Steven Blank has founded 4 startups, participated in 8, sat on many advisory boards and otherwise actively participated in the startup process(es).

On meta note, to elevate the level of discussion here I suggest that you try addressing substance of the matter being presented, not attacking the personality of the presenter.


I didn't attack his personality - I attacked 1) the content of the presentation 2) the presentation of the presentation and 3) cautioned against accepting this presentation as great because of the source. My argument wasn't very detailed, but it certainly wasn't an attack on the presenter.

You, on the other hand, did not defend the content of the presentation, but rather cited some qualifications of the author - ironically, just what I warned against accepting as proof of credibility.


Your point: Author is theorizing without connection to reality, more literally "This is academic gobbledy gook."

My counterpoint: Steven Blank has vast first-hand experience in startups.

Any more questions?


Academic opinions are almost always formed from experiments, and this presentation is academic.

My point was not that the author is theorizing without connection to reality. My point was I've heard the same thing said in half a sentence that he took dozens of slides to say.

But it's got that nice academic sheen!


What's the half sentence?


Don't neglect sales.


Certainly good advice but it may leave HN readers with the idea that hiring a VP of Sales person early is enough. Blank explicitly rejects this and suggests that early sales are the responsibility of the founders. In particular they have to treat their product as a hypothesis, which few successful sales folks are able to do. They treat objections as something to overcome. Only the founders can balance the question of whether they are talking to the right prospects with the right message about the right features.


Right, just like I said.... academic gobbleddy gook.


My apologies. What follows is only a portion of what's in the talk.

   1. The founders must sell. They must listen to prospects.
   2. They cannot hire a VP of sales until they have learned how to sell the product.
   3. The founders should view their business as a guess.
   4. They can see if they are correct by selling, which will confirm:
      a. Who the customer is (who will pay for the product)
      b. How to talk about the product
      c. If product has the right features


"This is academic gobbledy gook.I felt like I was hearing a bad tech sales pitch flipping through this with all of its markitecture diagrams."

Is there a reason why you thought so? Are you aware of a better way of doing this, according to you? We'd like to hear.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: