For the avoidance of doubt: I posted what I did because I thought it was correct, not in order to get karma. (And I’m as surprised as anyone by how much karma I got for it.)
The advice still seems pretty tautological to me, I’m afraid, or at least rather obvious: look for startups that have ended up winning and see if you can see what they did right. Isn’t that what everyone already does? (We could, I think, do with more looking at promising ones that have ended up losing and seeing what they did wrong. The winners are already highly visible and we aren’t likely to forget to look at them; the losers, not so much.)
And I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a thing as a “fully predictable startup”.
[EDITED to add: I see that the parent comment of this one is getting quite a lot of downvotes. For the record, none of them is mine.]
For the avoidance of doubt: I posted what I did because I thought it was correct, not in order to get karma. (And I’m as surprised as anyone by how much karma I got for it.)
The advice still seems pretty tautological to me, I’m afraid, or at least rather obvious: look for startups that have ended up winning and see if you can see what they did right. Isn’t that what everyone already does? (We could, I think, do with more looking at promising ones that have ended up losing and seeing what they did wrong. The winners are already highly visible and we aren’t likely to forget to look at them; the losers, not so much.)
And I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a thing as a “fully predictable startup”.
[EDITED to add: I see that the parent comment of this one is getting quite a lot of downvotes. For the record, none of them is mine.]
I’ll write about fully predictable startups at the open thread, may be a useful concept, and may be a waste