Does MVP/MLP really cut it anymore?
I think the days of MVP/MLP are really over.
Why?
It's gotten easier to build software that looks great with loads of functionalities. People are doing their homework, and have the capital to invest and build a product that looks great, has great support, and serves well.
It takes money, patience, and talent, all of which are available right now.
Consider this
Most good business ideas are simply based on existing ones with a small niche/twist. If that is the case, what is there to validate an idea? The win comes from great execution - which in part comes from a great team and persistence. When I have to pay for a SaaS, I most definitely will search for alternatives, and a mere MVP will never make the cut. I would rather pay and use software that looks super-polished - which means if I am using my MVP to validate user needs - even when the need exists, there will be tons of people not paying for it.
Example?
Building yet another community platform? yet another video editing platform? yet another eCommerce platform? yet another meditation app? You'll win by executing better and innovating in a niche, and it's got nothing to do with MVP-based validation anymore.
I am not saying that validating your idea isn't needed. In fact, I am a big proponent of validating the need. I personally failed at creating multiple products because I failed to validate the need.
What I advocate though is to do everything other than building an MVP/MLP to validate the need, and then go on to build a kick-ass product that is better than your competitors. Then out-execute them.
Besides validating the business, you are also validating your "solution" and, in some cases, the business model to the problem. Not something you want to skip.
If you build an MVP (or call it version 0.1), you might save yourself from spending weeks on version 1.0 of something that no one wants.
I believe that having an MVP is still a great thing for you, especially as a startup. It's the best way for you to hear and learn from prospective customers before launching your full product. We've learnt a lot from feedback and reviews that users have given over our MVP.
Look at descript. They thought about how someone could edit videos differently. And although video editing is a validated idea they would want to create an MVP to test their product.
They can try to validate through explaining the idea but to get actual useful data they would need an MVP.
I do agree that if someone is building "yet another ____" then there's no need for an MVP.
I think more people are interested in creating things that need an MVP rather than throwing money at a problem that's already solved to make it __% better.
Descript is a great example. Agree with you on that one, but their MVP is significantly better than most MVPs that I come across that merely exist to validate need (which they might fail at), and not about providing great value to customers.
Paperform and Tweethunter are others that come to mind.
I haven't actually seen descripts MVP. I think they started in 2017 but I only found them last year.
I bet it wasn't that great though. I'd be curious to see what Paperform and Tweethunters MVPs were. Only a few people will actually interact with them.
Maybe it's not that MVPs are a waste of time, but that first gen products shouldn't be so unfinished.
We're so used to alpha, beta, 1.0, 1.2, 1.3, etc. It's like how game companies put out unfinished games just to get the sales now. It's just a bad way to do things.
Validate the idea in whatever way you choose and then spend real time and money to launch something amazing.