Why you should test out many ideas at once.

[AndrewNC]

This post is an argument about why you shouldn't only focus on one idea when you're getting started out.

• I was just talking to an old friend of mine who said his plan going forward is to build 10 different products (in the same market/category), and see which ones take off.
• I remember interviewing the Vishen, the CEO of Mindvalley Academy for my magazine, and he said somewhere that when he first started, he tried to put out many products at once, and when one took off, he focused on that one.
• For my first successful business, I published 30 different niche magazines, and about 5-7 of them took off financially (and none of those 7 were the primary one I built first)

This goes against the common advice of "Focus on one thing".

So from my experience following the "try out a lot of things once", and having it work, I gained a few insights.

The first key is that everything I tried out was in one industry/category/marketing channel. I knew how to get the product in front of the end-users who were looking for it, and from there it was a test of demand and conversion rates. This allowed me to get a large volume of data very quickly to see if my products were a hit or not.

The data doesn't lie.

The second is rapid execution.

For three months straight, knowing that my products were in the same marketing outlet, and I knew how to get in front of the users - I executed fast. I didn't toy around with one idea and then wait a few weeks before the next. I was constantly pumping out content.

The third part is to cut off the losers very quickly.

For the ones that I knew didn't take off (and I had the data to verify that), I didn't have any emotional attachment to one idea or another. If the initial test didn't perform; I stopped putting my energy into it.

When I found out which one sticks, and which one takes off the quickest (with room for growth), that is the moment when I put all my energy in those specific ones.

</rant>

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[luniac]

i think this applies very much to the entertainment industry, where "soft validation" IS the Minimal Viable Product execution.

 

[Waspy]

This is the equivalent of throwing all the shit at the wall and seeing if any sticks. Rather than carefully analysing the shit, and choosing the stickiest to throw.

Both work (providing you are good at analysing shit). But one creates a lot more mess.

 

[luniac]

This is the equivalent of throwing all the shit at the wall and seeing if any sticks. Rather than carefully analysing the shit, and choosing the stickiest to throw.

Both work (providing you are good at analysing shit). But one creates a lot more mess.

its worth doing if u can rapidly prototype ur product vs carefully analyzing.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[AndrewNC]

This is the equivalent of throwing all the shit at the wall and seeing if any sticks. Rather than carefully analysing the shit, and choosing the stickiest to throw.

Both work (providing you are good at analysing shit). But one creates a lot more mess.

Both definitely work. I'm more focused with my approach now. Just reflecting back with most of the advice saying to focus on one thing; there is a counter argument for each side.

 

[sparechange]

ive been trying to sell a product to people on my fb that have liked a certain page, no deal.

been thinking of e-commerce though, very easy to scale and makes CENTS minus the entry part. which would be the importance of having a brand that people trust. now how do we go about knowing the correct product to sell? lets say we target the makeup industry, do we really want to compete with all the household name brands?

perhaps the answer is to just go out and fail at it. dont know much of instagram and facebook marketing, but it seems fairly simple (in theory) throw ads on fb > pay for followers > amass a 7 figure following and sell to a small % of your audience. yes i know im oversimplifying this.

 

[Sean Kaye]

When the average person tries to create five products at once, they usually end up with five incomplete products.

The person who is able to successfully deliver five complete products concurrently would probably be able to do them serially and get similar outcomes.

It's more about the person and less about the parallelism, IMHO.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[GMSI7D]

capitalism has been arround for hundreds of years

but we have not yet figured the formula to make it work predictably

cause -- -- > effect


we are still wandering arround in the dark like cave men hunting for food

" will this thing work ? how about this or that ?"



isn't that strange for an economic model that sustains society ?

wandering in the dark like cavemen in 2017 ?


wouldn't you pay millions for the right predictable formula ?

the only things that work predictably are taxes and bankers

while entrepreneurs are the cavemen hunting in the jungle for the guys that then take their hard earned money

 

[InspireHD]

The OP relates to trying many ideas in the same business. Like, having many products sold on Amazon.

Does this still apply to trying many (or a few) businesses at the same time in different categories? Say, an Amazon business and a Web Design business and lead generation, etc.? I would think that spreading yourself thin would cause you to not make very much progress or have much traction.