In the case of startup, turning and moving gears is not a sign of weakness; It is an vital tool for survival and represents a difficult path that the startup undertakes to seek out a matching to the product market.
But changing the direction and re -assessment of the product can be nervous. With this in mind, here are some lessons about trading, which I learned from my very own experience, evolving the product of my company from the cooperation platform for a handful of consumers managing comments to the full -fledged life cycle management system used by a whole lot of corporations.
Experiments on established answers
Our product has undergone at least five outhots points, continuously changing its strategic direction. Each turnover was justified in a rigorous hypothesis test and evaluation of results, which is fully compatible with the classic product development methodology.
Thanks to successes and failures, we have learned to detect when to rotate, assessing the ideal customer profile – taking into account the matching of the product, market conditions, real pain points, readiness to pay and adapt to the customer’s business model.
Small bands, area of interest market
Unit economics is the basis of any business model. When the cost of acquiring the customer and the value of life does not reconcile, it is a clear signal that something is mistaken with the audience or product.
Initially, we launched a hypothesis that the cooperation platform can be an ideal tool for promoting agencies to enhance 3D approval with clients. Meetings with art directors actually confirmed their interest. However, “liking” does not mean a desire to pay.
Self -sufficient or reluctant to pay customers
When we focused on Gamedev, we encountered a highly polarized market. On the one hand, the major studies of AAA were self -sufficient, acting with their very own expensive, established solutions. On the other hand, independent programmers – despite managing their assets in a chaotic way – showed little readiness to pay for a structured approach or specialized tools.
Our internal tests have shown that even a small variety of India who bought a purchase license does not provide a stable stream of revenues; Their volume was too low. Ultimately, the business model became unattainable because the basic audience does not want or could not pay.
Retention of demand requires a wide product reingineeria
Even in the presence of demand, the startup must realistically assess the entrance barriers, the crucial resources for product adaptation and the strength of competitive solutions already on the market.
Through interviews with designers and technologists, we discovered two significant barriers. First of all, our product would require significant reengineering to properly support their highly specific 3D models formats (for example, CAD files used for clothing patterns). Secondly, the market was already densely populated by highly specialized competitors.
The resources needed to successfully “break into” these specific niches have significantly exceeded the possibilities of our startup. The perceived risk was just too high in comparison with potential advantages.
No repeated pain
In SAAS, frequent use of the product is crucial to build habits, collect data and increase paid conversions. Growing a stable base of B2B users is tougher than earning; Regular free use seems to be a value, but the challenge is that users are willing to pay.
However, pilot projects revealed that time clouds and 3D models quickly became outdated during construction. Engineers did not trust the data and rarely used the platform to investigate the situation at the construction site. The application took place at most several times a month.
We received this signal after a series of interviews about the development of consumers with the first users who showed interest in the initial version of the platform. Despite their enthusiastic feedback (literally “WOW!” And “Amazing!”), The frequency of use of the product was very low.
Where large players are ineffective
The ideal customer profile does not only provide a general review of the segment of goal recipients; It allows for deep immersion at certain points of pain, which needs to be urgently solved.
Of course, we understood that an try and compete with giants like Siemens Teamcenter or Solidworks PDM or product data management can be in the starting. After consulting PDM experts and conducting market research, we identified a promising area of interest in which larger players proved to be ineffective.
Unsuccessful hypotheses: not failure, but priceless sources of data
Of course, the key is to focus and adapt to the eye of the product. But it is vital to always remember that the major goal is to create an progressive tool that comprehensively solves the client’s problem.
We must build a product that users actually need to make use of every day.