Comments on: Why The ‘Fail Fast’ Mantra Needs to Fail

By: Blake

Blake — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 08:59:23 +0000

Hey, how about “Fail fastest?” No? “Fail fasterer?”

By: Blake

Blake — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 08:59:23 +0000

Hey, how about “Fail fastest?” No? “Fail fasterer?”

By: Blake

Blake — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:59:23 +0000

Hey, how about “Fail fastest?” No? “Fail fasterer?”

By: honam

honam — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 10:01:50 +0000

Mark, for some reason my original comment to your post seems to have disappeared. As promised I wrote a post with more thoughts on this topic. Also, wrote about the great “fail fast” story I mentioned earlier.

http://www.blog.altosventures.com/vc/2010/03/fa...

By: honam

honam — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 05:01:50 +0000

http://www.blog.altosventures.com/vc/2010/03/fa...

By: the_real_fujun

the_real_fujun — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 02:22:05 +0000

Completely agree fail fast doesn't equal to no thoughtfulness, no tenacity, etc. However, I do think there is a time element here beyond launch and learn, especially for consumer internet companies. I look at the big success in consumer internet: Facebook, Zynga, Twitter, etc. They all got traction fairly fast (Twitter after completely changing their business). If I were an entrepreneur, I would launch and learn and iterate as much as possible, but I would also go for a different idea if the metrics aren't there after a few years. Caveat: I am sure there are many startups that succeed even if they didn't take off within the first couple of years, but the large success stories seem to have break out fairly fast. Any counter examples?

By: the_real_fujun

the_real_fujun — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:22:05 +0000

By: joeyflores

joeyflores — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 05:00:20 +0000

This has poker analogy written all over it to me.

Sometimes you hear tournament players say that they play aggressive and loose at the beginning of a tournament because they'd rather bust out early and not waste hours playing than go into the later rounds with a smaller stack. This is a great strategy for conserving time, but a terrible one for conserving money.

Good players play tight, wait for good hands, and then shove when they've got the best of it. That's how businesses should be run - conserve money and spend when you've got the nuts.

Failing Fast might be a good way to describe one hand, meaning fold quickly when you know you're beat and move onto the next hand, but not your whole strategy. I would agree with Mark that, without the proper disclaimers, Failing Fast sounds like a bust-out quick tournament strategy - not a sane way to run a business. It might be easy to say, but what good is a two-word descriptor of a business strategy that sends half of the crowd in the wrong direction?

By: skillguru

skillguru — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 04:18:16 +0000

Which entrepreneur thinks that his or her idea is going to fail ? Will anyone fund an entrepreneur who does not believe in himself or his idea ? So where did this mantra came from .
I think it came from VC's and angels and it is under their guidance when the team starts to build focus and vision on what could be reality and a business which makes sense.
If a team is not open to suggestions and be ready to change , it is definitely not a good sign.

What Mark says holds true for those individuals who think that they will create something viral , will have lots of traffic and think of business plan. If this works well , if not then something else.

It is always good to approach a VC once an entrepreneur has validated his idea. The business plan may change depending on market conditions , competition and users response but not with mindset of failing fast.

By: joeyflores

joeyflores — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 00:00:20 +0000