So my idea failed validation. Back to some soul crushing unproductive days
I've had this happen to me a few times now. This is usually how it goes:
- I have an idea that I think is the next best thing (because of course I do) and I get all fired up.
- I start searching for people who I think might want it.
- Ask some people bluntly if they would want what I'm offering, this usually gives false positives and people don't outright say no, so as to not hurt you. Although my hopes do go a little up (I know, I know they shouldn't)
- I do some mom testing (not perfectly, but the best way I can)
- Turns out my idea is not really offering much value, I lose all motivation and start watching a TV show (most probably a sitcom).
- 1 or 2 weeks of unproductive idea searching and TV show binging.
- Go to step 1
At this point, I've realised I can still get positives from this process. As told by A LOT of entrepreneurs, its better the idea fails validation in a week or so, than spend months building it and then realising no one wants it. Another positive is when I get motivated by the idea and am all fired up, I use that to learn some technology or framework that I usually would have procrastinated on learning.
For example, coming from Ruby on Rails I'd always wanted to learn Phoenix framework but had been putting it off for months. This time around, I used all the free time I had - while validating and waiting for the responses - to build the product using Phoenix, that way, it didn't all go to waste.
So that is my story, I hope it brings someone some value. I'd love to hear yours.
This cycle you’re describing is incredibly common, and honestly very self-aware.
One thing that stood out to me is that your process isn’t really “failing validation.” It’s more that validation is happening, but it’s leaving you without direction afterward.
A lot of early validation approaches produce a binary outcome. Either people say yes and you feel energized, or they don’t and everything collapses. That makes the emotional crash almost inevitable. What helped me was shifting validation from “is this a good idea?” to “which assumption just failed, and what does that tell me to test next?”
When an idea falls apart, that result still contains useful signal. Was it a demand issue, a timing issue, an audience mismatch, or a value framing problem? Those are very different failures, but they often feel the same emotionally if they’re not separated.
I also like what you’re doing with channeling the motivation into learning. That’s not wasted time. The only thing I’d add is that it can help to leave each validation cycle with at least one concrete takeaway, like “this audience has the pain but not the urgency” or “this problem exists, but not strongly enough to drive action.”
That way, even when an idea dies, it feeds the next one instead of resetting everything back to zero.
Curious, when your ideas failed, did you have a sense of why they failed, or did it mostly feel like a general lack of interest?
Instead of generating explicit ideas try to think which markets you would be interested in. And then interview potential customers to find out their problems.
Can't stress this enough. The best part is that there is no chance of failure with this approach. Talking to people in a market you enjoy and trying to poke around for problems is like an ongoing thread in the background.
Agreed!
Maybe think about the way you generate the ideas? Like there are many ways to do that...
Or what an invalidation actually means, can you build off if it like a pivot?
Or can you think of how to do it while relatively emotionally detached
@faraaz In case you haven't, you should read this post How to Get Startup Ideas
Go B2B - B2C is the dead end, given COVID and poverty and devastation from pandemic and new "remote-only" reality. The only companies that have money now are rich software companies, banks, large agencies. Look at what internal pains they have and what they're looking to solve. Forget B2C.
A lot of consumers might be hard up, but not all of them. And conversely a lot of businesses will struggle even though Apple and Google are doing well. So I am not sure it is that clear cut.
If you're looking to monetize and get financing, it's hard to expect that people (B2C) will spend too much beyond essential needs any time soon. Really essential, such as food, medications and shelter.
People often spend money on things they don’t need - recents stats suggest alcohol sales are up 20% over this time last year (in our area). When people feel bad, they very often buy things to make them feel better. Sometimes they’re buying a dopamine hit, sometimes they’re buying hope of improvement of some sort.
Businesses, will start to tighten up their spending - but consumers will continue to consume!
Those you just don't want to be your customers when you scale and your primary audience has patterns such as education, skills, intelligence, empathy, appreciation. It all depends - if you want to sell alcohol or open a sex shop - your right. Personally I'd have difficult time doing things that don't have long lasting impact and would not deliver new knowledge and innovation. The top of Maslow's pyramid - that's where I am. Problems must be talked out and solved, addressing symptoms only is not enough. Thus entertainment/alcohol/apparel cure symptoms, not the root causes. Rituals (buying when depressed) should be controlled medically by antidepressants. When I build a business in software/AI I don't want among my customers people that do not understand what they are buying and why they are buying.
That’s an admirable position to take. I was just pointing out that people will continue to spend regardless of your or anyone’s moral judgments (other than their own of course).
Alcohol was just a simple example of a consumable that people don’t need, but have and will continue to buy in order to make themselves feel better. The entire advertising industry is built on selling people stuff they really don’t need. 😂 this is not going to change and will probably continue to grow rather than decline.
Your original assertion that people won’t spend, IMO, is just flat-out wrong.
What makes difference is the attitude. Having empathy, and also problems being really essential. Having good understanding of how the world around you works and why things happen this way and not the other. Being observant and paying attention to smallest and seemingly unimportant details, building the context, being a philosopher, researcher and a leader not shy of challenge rather than a follower waiting for somebody to do the dirty stuff. A major shift in attitude may take to the point where you have only those ideas that really matter and can't be outcompeted or turn out being inessential and non-viable. If everyone can do something then it's probably a bad idea to do it.
This comment was deleted 5 years ago