464 hours into our startup. We still haven't launched.
Lots of people on IH have the motto "Build fast, fail fast". I disagree.
I definitely think theres a time and a place for "Build fast, fail fast" but for some projects it's just not feasible.
My co-founder and I started https://chainspy.net in December 2021, and we've been tracking almost every hour we spend on the startup.
So far we're 464 man hours in.
Optimistically, I think launch will be ready at around 600 hours.
In development we've definitely had our ups and downs. But I believe our main success is consistency.
To help us achieve our consistency, we started with a contract that equates to:
"Work at least 4 hours a week on Chainspy, or you don't vest your .5% equity this week".
That way, if one of us consistently meets our productivity goals and the other doesn't, the performer is rewarded with more equity.
What does IH think about "Build fast, fail fast?".
Is consistency the most poweful driving factor for your project?
I plan to have a more technical breakdown of our worktime once we launch.
Follow me and chainspy for more :).
If there are two of you working full-time on this (40-hour work week), then you'd finish building in about two months, using your 600 hour target. I think that still qualifies as building fast and launching.
People have taken things to the extreme in ways that appear kind of clickbaity to me. I guess you can build a product in a week to test feedback, but that doesn't work for every idea. Sometimes the initial MVP needs more work.
Regardless, the idea to build fast and fail fast came about because founders would spend years on a product before launching. If you're getting your product launched in a couple of months then you're doing just fine.
couple of months is perfect. we built an MVP for a tech founder and launched in 3 months. She was a non-technical founder and our agency was her technical partner basically. it was a very complex projects with lots of dependencies and moving parts. we did it through heavy prioritization and keeping focused on the real value proposition. the founder would bring us new feature requests but we would advise her on what to build and what to hold off for later phases.
This makes sense. As a lifelong procrastinator, I've come up with ideas, half-ass them, and taken a long time to launch, if ever. The "launch fast" advice is often taken to an extreme to prevent procrastinators and those who struggle with indecisiveness from stagnating in launching their products. However, it really is product dependent on how long it will take to launch an MVP. Deep down, we all know if we're spending too much time on a project, in that case, we should use the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) philosophy.
We're a team of 7 and spent 50% of the last 6 months working on the Bitloops Language and Platform and still haven't launched.
It's all about the complexity, the problem you're solving as well as how you're solving it. And of course, can you sustain it for a long period of time?
We've been bootstrapping with consulting work in order to have the time to build something worthwhile in the developer space.
I don't believe that you are slow in the development of your SaaS. The most important thing is to deliver a functional product with compelling features that will retain customers and keep them engaged, even if there may be room for improvement in the future.
My co-founder and I also took some time to create our product ruttl and even launched on Product Hunt 2.5 years after the initial launch. But it was a good decision, simply cause we were better prepared.
All the best!
It really depends on your products, if you are launching the old idea products, you should spend times to make it perfectly. Cuz, there are so many good choice in the market. If you launch the new products to the market, "Build fast, fail fast" is great practice to take some feedback, then improve your products daily
600 hours are 25 days for 1 person or 12.5 days for a 2 people, I wouldn't call building a sass product in 2-3 weeks slow.
I don't know ... you can finish your 600 hours, and see that there isn't a high demand for what you are building, it will be little bit disappointing.
There are multiple ways of launching fast, at the end of the day we are talking about a release into the world of your idea, not of the finished product (it won't be finished).
A good article can already be something valuable. The thing is to find the people first, then the product. Doing it the other way around it's risky.
Maybe if it's your first time it's not an issue, you are learning a ton, but later you will appreciate to not lose 600 hours again to discover that nobody needs what you are building.
So it's good you've shared the website, are you getting some positive signals? If not, are you sure that when your project is ready you'll get more enthusiasm? take in mind a visitor won't see it anyway... if you plan to make a video, just make the video now.
I am having the same experience. Quality is key.
Keep up your good work!
Nice i will say still your doing work fast and no doubt the time depends on the project on which your working... your working on good tool wish you best of luck for your smooth launching.
While I see where you’re coming from I don’t get the part with the equity. This feels more like a working against each other instead together. I also don’t see any way this could help the situation when things are a little rough.
Maybe you can elaborate a little more on this. :)
Sure thing :).
I've attempted to partner up on a few projects with a few people, but it often feels like. I have the idea, you do all the work, I get most of the benefits.
I wanted to make sure that there is opportunity of 50/50 split of equityfor my co-founder and I, but to motivate us to work on the project, we earn it over time as we are being productive.
The specifics of the contract look like this:
I think this is also useful where if a partner falls off the project, they will still hold onto the equity for the work they have done. This makes easier to find another partner, as you can still offer the equity the person that left is no longer claiming.
Which role do you usually find yourself in? I take you do all the work, and someone else came up with the idea + got most of the benefits?
This is an interesting approach. I think the weekly vesting is interesting coz if someone is slacking behind you will notice it early. And if they do, you should probably cut them loose in my experience.
But it seems 0.5% is a bit much per week? If you are two ppl it would take just under 2 years to vest to 50% each.
You want to leave as little equity to a departing founder as possible. And this is why the cliff is super important (and a longer vesting schedule is hugely beneficial). Having someone with 25% of equity for doing a year of work (four hours per week) is a lot and it may be a huge burden down the road.
Just some thought. I find the weekly vesting an interesting idea. Will think on it.
I think "Build Fast, Fail Fast" often gets misinterpreted as "ship whatever you've got even if it's lower quality". MVP means MINIMUM VIABLE product. What's minimally viable for one company could be totally different for another company. Your MVP might take 600 hours, mine might take 1200, etc. You said it yourself, consistency is key.
I agree! All stuff about "you should be embarrassed when you launch or you've launched too late" etc, makes sense in many ways, but it is no excuse for shitty work!
Also, to your point, Dropbox could not ship an initial product where people's files got lost. Quality is super important for a product like theirs. A computer game is completely different, the gamer audience is somewhat used to glitches, especially on an early realease.
Hey Jack, All the best :)
btw, 600man hours is just small amount :D
1200 Hours and Counting to our Launch https://clappit.io
Imagine if you are a solo developer, at 4 hours per week, it would be pushing 3 years to get to MVP. In that time frame, trends change, technology changes, platforms evolve, and one library upgrade means you will re-write most of your code before you ship.
More importantly, by that time, the initial excitement has evaporated, and the would-be founder moves on. That is why I think to build fast, and fail fast could be a helpful guiding principles. Its still only a principle; in reality, it takes time to bring a concept to life.
I have been pushing for 2 years myself, and I just barely launched my MVP. And my product is a simple Invoice app. In reality, those two years equate to less than 3 months of full dev work.
Keep going! You have the end in sight. Good luck.
Most things said on the Internet as driven by the needs of Venture Capitalists. They want to see quick results and are driven by it.
When I was running edocr.com, if I adopted the build fast fail fast culture, we would have gone in the first year. It took me 7 years to bootstrap the company to an Exit. I saw many competitors enter and die. Including Microsoft, twice.
We can only do what we can do within the resources available to us. Plus, everything is circumstantial. @PinkyFace
But you can speed up now thanks to free talent from https://skilledup.life, my latest tech startup. I founded this to address the problem most of us have. How do we build a team when we do not have cash to pay for salaries?
We are now fast approaching 20,000th Volunteer mark.
All the best
Manoj
[email protected]