Lenny's Podcast: Product | Career | Growth
00:19:30 · Lenny Rachitsky
[00:19:30] S1: Yeah. As you're talking, I'm just thinking what are all the best products and are they all just kind of one word ... Are they copies and evolutions of existing products or how many are just completely brand new? And I'm looking around like the iPhone, there's phones before and they kind of took the elements of what was great, made them awesome. My Owala, I don't know, water bottle, there was water bottles that worked and then they added things to make it better. Chrome, I don't know. I'm just looking around. It's so interesting how once you start to think about it through this lens, most products are better versions of things that existed before. A. Nd then I'm thinking about as a product team, what do you often do? You go, look at the competitors, look at all their flows, here's what they're doing, here's what's working, look at all these great ideas, and then you build on that. So I think it's easy to get turned off to this idea of the word copy, but as you think about it, this is mostly how products end up getting built anyway.
00:20:24 · Mark Pincus
[00:20:24] S0: Well, there's so much on this that we could literally spend the whole podcast on it, which I'd be fine with too, or do a whole episode just on this because so much comes up for me. On the one hand, I think about Nikita, who I think you've had on. And I love his story on TBH. It's a perfect example of he found something proven in someone else's product. That was my first company, Freeloader. What I found was in the Netscape browser and in the Internet Explorer browser, they had buried in there a feature of offline browsing. And my entire product was offline browsing. But they had it as this buried power user feature and I saw the genius in that for that moment because bandwidth was so slow that I was like, "Oh, we can make an entire product just around that one feature." Nikita saw his perfect product buried inside an Arabic only version of his product and he said, "Oh my God, they nailed it." So I think when we can see something that is proven already in someone else's product, but they have the wrong idea around it, that's gold. And then to your question of is every product derivative? Is every product from Proven, Better, New? My answer is no. And I talked about this a little bit in the book and in my course, but the question is at the outset for all of us, which path do you want to be on? And I argue that if you go down this path of just innovate, start with a blank whiteboard, don't look at any other products, that is kind of Rovio getting to Angry Birds. They made 45 games. Every single game was totally different, not, as far as I could tell, learning from the previous failures or the market and their 45th shot on goal was Angry Birds and it was a hit and it was innovative. But the odds, that's wildcat drilling and do you want to have those odds? Or do you want to do what OMGPOP did, which is very similar story but opposite path, which was OMGPOP created the hit game Draw Something and Zynga bought them. They were the number one game and app in the App Store for 60 days in 2012. But OMGPOP was on their last dollar. They had tried something totally innovative. No one ever seen or tried it before, it failed completely. And now they were ruthlessly, desperately in need of a hit and now they did Proven, Better, New perfectly.
00:23:29 · Mark Pincus, Lenny Rachitsky
They said, "We're going to take this proven game and do everything about it as perfect students of what is already working and viral on mobile." And they perfectly copied our turn-based system from Words With Friends and they made a massive hit. [00:23:49] S1: Hell yeah. I love this idea of moral arbitrage, that's such a ... Thinking about this- [00:23:54] S0: It's very Peter Thiel-ian, you know? [00:23:57] S1: Yeah. So there's so many fun threads that kind of connect to all this. And you have all these amazing contrarian perspectives on how to build amazing products. One is be less ambitious. Talk about why that's a really good lens to actually build more ambitious products.
00:24:12 · Mark Pincus
[00:24:12] S0: I'm in the middle of relearning that lesson myself right now. And I would say there's so many paradoxes in this and one that I've had to learn over and over again is if we're too ambitious at the outset and too ambitious and visionary about the product we want to build, then we will probably miss product market fit because we won't start at a small enough, humble enough place because it might ... Usually the starting point for these products is embarrassingly small. So many of these massive hit products or franchises started with such humble- Started with such humble non-ambitious places and The Facebook was just an app to check out girls and guys at Harvard. And the irony for me is I've found that my career has gone in these waves and maybe some of your other founders have had this experience too, that I've started in a very humble place of, "I just want to get to anything, any product market fit", had bigger success than I imagined I would have in my first two companies, Freeloader and Support.com. They both started with very small, humble premise. And then afterwards felt like now I can do anything. And I know Elon is the exception to the rule. Part of it is I think he can raise magical unlimited amounts of capital, which helps, but then he does not start in humble places at all. But for the rest of us mortals, I'd say that we tend to after success feel the need to do something bigger the next time. That's human instinct and we want to be more ambitious. And so when I got to Tribe and I saw social networking and LinkedIn was just starting and I saw how big the opportunity was, I tried to do everything with Tribe. It was really ambitious and I didn't pick one use case. And there was multiple inside Tribe that worked. The tribes, the idea of these urban tribes worked. People loved it, but it was too ambitious and so we failed. And then I was so humbled and I was in this abyss we can talk about for so long and I was so just desperate to get out of that abyss that by the time I got to Zynga, I did something that was embarrassingly small. I mean, to be 41, multi-time successful founder that could go do something important in the world and what did I do? I made a Facebook app like a poker game, not even a Facebook app, I mean a poker game. It was people thought I had no dignity.
00:27:16 · Mark Pincus, Lenny Rachitsky
I mean people were like, "Mark, there's so much you could do in the world." But I'd say my ambition came down to a 1000 ft altitude, not a 100,000 ft. And that was the key to that being successful. And I see this with, it's just so hard. I see it with so many product founders and it almost gives a new founder an advantage over a multi-time successful founder because we have too much rope to hang ourselves. It's too easy to raise money and recruit teams against a big vision before we've gotten to product market fit, but the world doesn't care about your resume. That's the good news for everyone watching. Everyone has the same chance and in a lot of ways if you're in a more humble place, you have a better opportunity. So the paradox is the more ambitious you are that the more humble you should be in the smaller place you should be willing to start. [00:28:25] S1: One of your insights along these lines is that this is your advantage as a startup is to be less ambitious because a Zuck needs to go really big because the revenue is already so high. Anything they take on needs to be many billion-dollar business opportunity. And as a startup, you don't need to do that. And this is how you end up discovering some of the biggest ideas in the end. [00:28:45] S0: Being willing to pursue these little threads when they're flaky, when they're not a business, when they're so much earlier, and so many of the successful companies today started there. [00:28:59] S1: Is there an example that comes to mind when, because what's a company or two that started very unambitious?
00:28:59 · Lenny Rachitsky, Mark Pincus
[00:28:59] S1: Is there an example that comes to mind when, because what's a company or two that started very unambitious? [00:29:05] S0: I love the story of Bolt.new that really blew up last year. I loved it so much. I coldmailed the founder because I was just so impressed with- [00:29:14] S1: [inaudible 00:29:14]? [00:29:14] S0: ... Yeah. And they toiled an obscurity on something that they were into and then they open sourced it. I think they were barely able to keep going with commercial development. And then they had this realization one day of, "Wait a second, if we take these web stacks, this virtual machine that we've been making work on the web, but we actually add that to an AI coding copilot, we now have something that's better than what anybody else has." And I think that was just a great story that they were passionate about one thing and they stuck with it. [00:30:00] S1: Eric was on the podcast. We talked about that. [00:30:02] S0: Oh, he was? I'm so impressed. In a lot of ways, Slack also was humbled. Stewart keeps trying to start game companies and those turn into unexpected bigger hit companies. We'll see what he does. And actually now has probably so much capital he could just keep doing a game company this time. [00:30:27] S1: But I think to your point, he might try again to unhumble, go big.