Ask HN: How to learn marketing and sales as a solo entrepreneur?
Hello, I failed with a several products that I built (easy part for devs like us) and then I didn't know how to get the product in front of customers, how to commercialize it, how to increase amount of users, etc.
Many of you succeed in this field, so I'm genuinely curious how to learn it? What are decent learning resources out there?
Thanks in advance
209 comments
[ 5.0 ms ] story [ 246 ms ] threadhttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39316653
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39316653
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37021837
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36922114
Some good recs in the above threads. You'll be able to learn and thrive with those, IMO.
That said, it basically boils down to 3 things:
Personas
Channels
Messages
You have an archetype of someone in your head that would like your tool, you want to test if that archetype exists. That persona likely consumes content, your job then is to understand the channels that persona typically likes to consume their content, and try to serve them a message they can understand in the time you have to serve it. There are thousands of personas in millions of channels consuming billions of messages, that is why it's hard.
smooooth finnish with a free puppy
nuance indeed
call that? the keys to the palace and a free puppy sale!, who could say no?
for the parent: hire this guy!
If you cant, then get a jobby job selling retail to the masses, and just sell sell sell, get a thicker hide, and be able to summon a smile for the worst person you are ever going to meet
When I got the job selling an insanely inferior version of the product I couldn't sell the formula was this, sit down and listen...
They had 40 different registered businesses all selling the same software but with a different name to protect the guilty. A modest size call center divided into 40 groups. Each prospect would get at least 40 calls but more often something towards 120. Pricing started high then gradually lowered with a few "errors" so that the prospect could say they got a call 2 days ago and they only charged x. "Ohh, that cheap???" Etc
It worked, people got really angry 30 to 80 calls in and they purchased from the "other" company.
It’s a free hour of consulting with someone that has experience in exactly what you’re struggling with…worst case scenario (no offense neom) you walk away with an hour less to binge Netflix and a hilarious story; best case they point something out that moves you to profitable months or years sooner.
My instinct tells me that you posted this here because you wanted something like this.
It's both easy and deep reading. Long but worth it. It changed marketing for me from smoke and mirrors to a systematic, fun, creative analytical process.
The ideal thing to do is become your customer, hang out with them, learn from them. Shape your product around them. They will tell you what they will buy for how much.
Only a few products are so innovate that everyone understands what it is and the value it brings and they demand it and only you can give it to them : think ChatGPT. Those products market themselves once word gets out. Is that your product? If not you have to tell people or show people.
Any advice I give may not apply to you and your business. My business is b2b and it's a platform for certain kinds of professionals as well as an API that powers many well known businesses.
I've only had success through two general strategies:
1. Networking (friend of friends, friend of customers, etc). Leverage your network to find more customers.
2. The "Long Game" (SEO, word of mouth, etc). This is where I get most of my customers.
I'd say focus on the long game from day one (blog posts, good marketing pages, etc). Use networking to determine how valuable the product is and if people give a damn about it. If no one wants to talk to you about it, no one is going to want to pay for it.
I think much of the stuff that you need to do is common sense (put word out, write about it, encourage word of mouth). And it's usually obvious what will definitely kill your project (don't talk about it to anyone, don't listen to customer feedback etc.) so do the opposite of those.
My general experience has been that word of mouth is slow but very reliable and the customers you get from there are usually high value.
This is a key thing. A lot of developers operate in the belief that “if you build it they will come”.
A small amount of market validation would prevent a lot of wasted time.
- Do people have the problem you are solving?
- Are they willing to pay a sufficient amount to solve it?
- Are there enough of them to make it worthwhile?
The real danger is that we often don’t want to hear the answers to these questions. So we either don’t ask or we dismiss the answers that we get. Wishful thinking is a dangerous thing.
When you start out, you probably only have a vague idea of what the product will be.
The sort of people you want to talk to might not want to talk to you. They are busy people and you don't even have a product!
People saying they will give you money is worthless, in my experience. Only people actually giving you money counts for anything.
Estimating the market size is hard and not all that relevant. See also: https://successfulsoftware.net/2013/03/11/the-1-percent-fall...
Successful businesses I have worked at have started out solving a real problem for someone (in a business) - with that person telling us that they know other businesses have the same problem.
If someone in an industry comes to you with a problem - and they have worked in the industry sufficiently long enough to have been in multiple companies - they can give you a pretty good idea of what size the prize might be.
The difficulty a lot of us have working in software is that we don’t really get enough exposure to these people.
Simple and superb root cause analysis!
It takes the looooong web 2.0 funnels and flips it to a single step:
Your customers pay to interact with your app at all and there is insatiable demand at the beginning, unless you do some boomer-level system design that is based on pretending that a 3 trillion dollar crypto native audience doesnt exist already and you need to onboard a bunch of technophobes.
In comparison, the entire web 2.0 ethos basically sums up to getting a customer to put their credit card into your website for a small charge, as a funnel for a bigger recurring charge later
in web3 all of your users are at the last step at the very beginning. they are even paying for all your hosting costs. they are paying to update your database! and your actual business model of being some form of plumbing with a transaction fee, if you didnt just sell a token collection, is fine and has low overhead costs
this will continue attracting developers and their entire audience in perpetuity because the entire web 2.0 ecosystem cannot compete with that
Thank you for the insights.
the only people that have an issue with web3 have a characteristic and typically describe an irrelevant system design that doesn’t factor in the simple reality that users are paying in web3 and wouldn’t in web2.0, the only people having an issue creating web3 apps have a characteristic, for example I just got off a call with someone trying to jump on the web3 bandwagon for hotel reservations - a technophobic audience that should be ignored for web3 ux fictions - and the only people funding broken web2 apps that are supposed to use web3 rails have a characteristic
reclaim the term like every marginalized group does
How much did you make?
> reclaim the term like every marginalized group does
I'm 34.
aiming to do more of both this cycle
I'm assuming this is USD?
It's curious, because some of your other posts[0] would suggest someone who is a little more price sensitive than someone who has made more than 10 million dollars from their own website. But I'm probably reading this incorrectly or something.
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33415595
also out of curiosity, in your world why does me saying a third party charge other people money, over two years ago or at any point in time, suggest what you said it would suggest. it would be a matter if other people are price sensitive, for reference
if one were looking for something to invalidate or grasping for an ad hominem, doesnt it require interpreting the posting accurately as well at a bare minimum?
In my experience, people who are less price sensitive tend to not think about inconsequential sums. So it was surprising to me to read that someone who has made over $10,000,000 would care about whether or not Calendly would charge for no-shows.
Just curious about the thought process. That's all.
the answer is that calendly does not charge for no-shows and my time is valuable, which would match the worldview you’re looking for, and on the defensive perception, I’m not sure if you really understand the interaction proposed.
but if we were on the same page all along, then we also have a different definition of defensive since clarifying whether you are perceiving the same concept is not defensive to wonder about.
Like, isn’t there another comment somewhere else in my post history that would be better to question what you think an 8-figure HN user would be doing with their time? since you don’t know the value of the intended conversations on the calendly schedule, that requesting they charge wouldn’t be factor in supporting your validity or not of price sensitivity or inconsequential sums, and the other party would be charged either way, not me. I would define this whole line of reasoning to be a non-sequitur.
in any case, if you would like to talk more about web3 user acquisition funnels and how it compresses web2.0 ones, removing a magic based marketing industry and replacing them with paying customers, I'm available for that.
no response has acknowledged the substance of what has been said in this entire subthread, only that I replied at all
if you would like to talk more about web3 user acquisition funnels and how it compresses web2.0 ones, I’m available for that
plenty of cool shit for those who do things onchain tho
philisters on HN are not our clientele. they’ll never get it and it doesnt matter anymore. but if you are a developer or “BUIDL” er there are unique system designs that are superior than anything web2.0 infrastructure has to offer.
I always recommend the book The Mom Test to would-be entrepreneurs. It goes into more detail on why asking people if they will buy something is worthless (as you mentioned), and how you can ask much better questions to find and validate problems worth solving.
I'd say in addition to entrepreneurs, it's an important book for product teams / product engineers to understand what the Mom Test teaches, and tune the filter on asking the right questions to get the highest signal, and ensure the solution closely matches the value prop for the customer. Then sales and marketing get a whole lot easier when you've asked the right questions and solved the right problems.
Just set correct expectations that your MVP won’t be something for the customers.
Or maybe it will. But I think biggest issue is having high hopes after completing v0.1.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30831688
I don't waste anytime and never felt like I stumbled on a product idea that warrants me building something.
Therefore, I haven't built anything but the projects at work.
As a rule, I wouldn’t trust building anything depending on a small company - “no one ever got fired for choosing IBM”.
(I also wouldn’t trust building a project on top of a Google product. But that’s a different story)
Not as a solo entrepreneur, but I have been on both sides of a similar situation. I was working for a struggling startup where our largest customer who made up 70% of our revenue insisted on the code being put in escrow that they would get access to under certain conditions.
The condition happened - company was sold for scraps - and then they hired me as a contractor for them using the code they now had access to them. Yes everything was above board, they worked with the acquiring company to allow me to keep my work laptop and in my severance agreement the acquirer released me from non competes, etc.
Two companies later I was on the opposite side where I was one of the decision makers where we were going to extend the contract with a solo entrepreneur for a SaaS. We were going to be 70% of his revenue. I suggested we also get his code put in escrow and I was responsible for actually watching his build process once per quarter where he pulled his escrowed code out and built and ran from scratch.
Trust no one, and it doesn't matter if it's a Fortune whatever, a small enterprise, a small company or an individual.
A company or business of any size can axe a product they own at any time, unless they contractually promised you support.
Also some companies like Microsoft, Salesforce, AWS etc are more trusted by “the enterprise” than Google.
Is there an easy process for your customers to move their data over to a similar service if they don’t want to renew the contract?
> then they hired me as a contractor for them using the code they now had access to
Did you live in the same city? Or did you work remote?
Did they want to meet you in person first, before the escrow agreement?
Maybe that can be an addition to your answer: Start with big companies close to where you live?
For those located in India (I would argue anywhere outside US really), in my opinion, trying to find customers in your network is a waste of time, even if you're wealthy. Most societies outside US aren't as abundant in their mind nor value driven the same way people in the US are
Instead focus on the long game, keep filling in the blanks on your ICP and what their pushes and pulls are by trying to figure out who is the right segment to serve so you can save time and energy
Can you elaborate on what you mean by that?
And what tech stack did you use?
The initial product was built with Ruby on Rails. It stayed in Rails for three years. At that point I had enough API traffic the memory on the server was getting out of control and Ruby just couldn't handle the concurrent traffic (with a reasonable budget).
I re-wrote the entire product in Go on the third year mark (converted ERB to Go templates, re-wrote all backend logic with Go, etc).
The Go version worked wonderfully and reduced my server costs substantially (from $600/month to $88/month). I had the Go version running for four years and I re-wrote it again in Rust (actixweb, askama, htmx).
For funsies, I re-wrote a portion in Rust and noticed the amount of code used was substantially lower (about 50% less code in Rust). I was surprised by that (I figured it would use more being lower level). At that same time I was growing frustrated with maintaining the Go monolith (it had a lot of legacy cruft from the Rails port and spaghetti code). I decided to re-write the whole thing in Rust and cull the cruft in the process.
Did you purposely leave out outbound sales? Cold emails, trade shows, working the phones?
There's lots of competition, and most customers are already using something to help with their problem.
What worked for me 25 years ago is not going to work as well today. Well it will, but its much harder to stand out from the crowd.
Some things don't change though. You need to find customers before you find (ie build) product. Ideally you get a deposit before you start writing. Getting customers is harder than writing code, so do that first.
Finding customers is hard. You need to get close enough to see their pain. You need to make that pain go away. It's seldom as easy as you expect to make pain go away (the devil is in the details.)
The good news is that it is possible. And it's hard enough that it keeps the competition away. Do it well, carve out a niche, and you can build something good.
And always remember- customer service is what you are really selling, not software.
To add to this, there's always a catch 22 problem - how can I show something to customers to sell to, when I don't even have a product to sell? It's expected in a sales meeting or often any meeting, that you have a demo that would show your product concept for them.
I can't state this enough, but literally build on the shoulders of giants. Build on existing tools, and I don't mean open source, but existing products. Best advice I got from watching one of those AI fad-chasing YouTubers. Is it an online store idea? Build on Shopify first. Is it a chatbot? Use KoreAI or DialogCX. Is it a CRUD app? Use Glide + Google Sheets. Customer Service? Maybe they just need a Hubspot/Zendesk with some custom integrations.
Most customers are looking to buy a functionality, not a "product" . Oftentimes your MVP will be enough to carry them for a long time. You wouldn't even need to write a single line of code yourself for quite a bit of time.
Like you said, the hard part is actually meeting the potential prospect and ensuring that they will pay you for the product. In my (very limited) experience, I've had 60k-employee billion dollar companies outright refuse to buy (instead hiring 2000 underpaid fresh graduates in India to build a worse product), while a 250-employee million dollar company being super-enthusiastic about paying a premium price for it (even though they have their own dev team). If I had gone by the views of the billion dollar company, I wouldn't have found a market niche for my product, but fortunately I stubbed my toe (literally!) and found the actual customer instead.
The other 60k employee company is a company that does as much in net profit as the market cap of the first company.
Lots of great experiences retold - from the startup world rather than some Coca Cola exec.
I think its
Consider though that selling to other developers is really, really hard. There is no low hanging fruit anymore.Rather than building web projects, I'm not shifting my attention to overlooked areas (C, CLI, other low level areas)
- you can't outsource sales before pmf, and you probably don't have pmf yet
- talk to (at least) a potential customer every day, keep track of what you said and how they responded
- make and give your leads materials they can use to sell internally, figure out who makes decisions (probably not who you talked to first) and make sure it's relevant to them; you may need multiple versions
- aggressively think about pmf, don't worry too much about official definitions here. just ask yourself: "if i took a month long vacation, could sales ostensibly be on autopilot?" if no, you don't have it yet. if yes, take the vacation you're doing great
- look for pmf by making your idea smaller, not bigger, or you will waste money and time
- when you can make a product idea really tiny in scope, and someone will still pay for it, you've identified a strong pain point you can exploit (aka charge for). Build the product/platform around that, not the other way around. Never convince yourself you have to build a huge thing before you can sell it, you're most likely wrong. optimize for finding that tiny scope early on
- when i say look for or find or think about pmf i mean come up with a way to pitch your product, and then pitch it to someone new. then compare that to the last times you did it. you have to talk to a lot of people for this to work, way more than you think. your product will not sell itself, you will have to talk to a lot of people. as many as physically possible to get the feedback you need to create a sales cycle that runs without you i.e. pmf. this is something that took me multiple years to internalize. you're just never talking to enough potential customers
- don't ignore seo, and pick names that are easy to say and read; figure out where your customers consume media and get your content there. every business will be different here, and you gotta get creative
- something i saw on reddit that stuck with me: first time founders think about product, second time founders think about distribution. i operationalize this as: do not begin engineering a product until you're clear on how it will be marketed and sold, bonus points if you can convince someone to sign a contract saying they want it-- and remember in B2B/gov this can (should?) be a sales channel partner not just an end-user
This!! And your related explanation is so good!
then there's the bigger resellers like cdw or insight and companies like carahsoft and similar
some research firms looking at grants will work with you if you offer something innovative to add to their application
it's just making as many connections as possible, everyone wants to make money so just be honest with people and usually they're open to it
*fixed a typo
still on this way as well :)
The trust you earn by trying to genuinely be of service to the market pays back dividends. Not in an easily quantifiable RoI. But eventually it will.
The other bit of advice is you need to set some boundaries and expectations for working together. This includes closing the sale (we need contract back by X date or we can’t work together) and when executing / serving them (we can’t exceed this limit, we need payment by Y or service will be paused). Hold yourself to being disciplined and not people pleasing. You’ll regret the latter usually. Sometimes the best thing you can do is NOT close the deal.
Don’t undersell yourself. Set a price point where half of your inbound is unable to work with you. Eliminate bad fits early.
As a solo entrepreneur your time is extremely limited. So boundaries and setting a good price point are very important so people don’t waste your time.
And because you’re probably still looking for PmF these trusting relationships turn your potential customers into advisors. Treat your best customers advice as sacrosanct. You’ll find a niche in partnership with them.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41862332
https://www.foundingsales.com
I should clean it up and organize it better at some point, but there is a big variety these days.
Step 1: Offer your product for free. Free (and useful) products spread organically on internet. If people aren't using your product even when it's free, no amount of marketing will make it successful.
Step 2: If people are "consistently" using your free product over time, you can then offer additional value at a price or try any other pricing strategy.
Not all products can be offered for free, and that's okay. It's worth spending some money initially (if you can) because your primary goal is to reach Step 2.
In my experience, many product makers who describe themselves as being bad at sales just can't get their head out of their own view point. So even speaking to a person who is just marginally above average at sales and describes it as an outsider can really shift their way of thinking. The customer may not use the product in the exact way you think they will when you made it. Having the benefit of seeing how others see your product will put you on the same footing when you pitch it to them.
Also, find a way of presenting that fits your personality. I'm pretty mater of fact and my sales pitch has always been sort like "we have some cool stuff for sale, you use some of the exact kind of stuff we sell, let's talk about whether our stuff would be good for you." Then I just ask them questions. Sales people have the (deserved) stereotype of blathering on about their product or service and being tone deaf to whether it's a good fit or not. I ask and I ask. People will talk about themselves quite a bit and in my mind, I am taking notes on what may be a good fit for them and what might not be.
Eventually, they've run out of things to talk about and I'll start talking about what I think they should look at and why. That brings me around to another thing--fitting in. I have no problem telling people if one of our offerings is not something they should consider. I don't want to force something on someone, when they are smart enough to know it isn't right for them. Cajoling someone into a sale that isn't a great fit just leads to problems after the sale, then I'm putting out fire with them when I should be selling to others. Not only does it build trust with the customer to pass on things, but it's just the right thing to do.
Think of yourself not as a salesperson, but as a problem solver. If they have a business problem your product can solve, tell them.
Good luck and I hope this helps!
The first book I would read is Crossing The Chasm by Geoffrey Moore. After this, in no particular order you could have a look at:
- This is Marketing by Seth Godin
- Positioning by Al Ries
- The Challenger Sale by Matthew Dixon and Brent Adamson
- Predictable Revenue by Aaron Ross
- Traversing The TRaction Gap by Bruce Cleveland
- From Impossible to Inevitable by Aaron Ross and Jason Lemkin
I would also have a look at the models created by Winning By Design [1]. But be sceptical! These models do however hold some value in terms of visually presenting the sales funnel and gaining understanding of land and expand.
Best of luck to you!
[1]: https://winningbydesign.com/resources/blueprints/
The only real problem which exists in society is the problem that the system itself prevents us from solving. The problem of allowing people to obtain money to buy the damn stuff that is being produced and whose production could be easily scaled up at will and there is nothing save climate change and other doom narratives getting in the way of massively scaling up production and automating everything. Letting the pie grow as big as is required to satisfy everyone. Ask just about anyone on the street what they need and if they're honest, 99% of them will tell you that they need more money to buy the stuff that already exists. The government could essentially give free land and free money (UBI) to everyone, new cities would be built and the system would expand and decentralize outward, creating an abundance of opportunities.
How do you solve the problem of helping people to get more money when the entire monetary system is designed to concentrate wealth, to take away opportunities and wealth from the masses. The only solutions to the most important problem in society are political. There are no business solutions for this problem within the current political framework.
There is no incentive to actually automate anything (beyond the point when it satisfies only the elite) when the masses are systematically broke and desperate for money. People will always be as cheap as machines. Slavery exists on the periphery and will grow in the current system. It will come down to the cost of food for a slave or electricity for a machine... However, the slave can produce their own food in the same way that an intelligent machine could produce its own electricity. The net cost is 0 in both cases. Slavery is more achievable, even today.
Now if you're interested in ways to make money without solving the only problem that matters, then you need to basically come up with a solution to make the problem worse; which helps concentrate the money faster, more surveillance, more control, more plausible deniability, more dulling of the senses, more inequality, more suffering... Basically anything that helps to prevent political change. Nothing else pays in the current political framework besides protecting the current political framework.
When capital barriers are low and you are able to build a product which solves a problem 10x better than the competition within a specific niche, it comes as quite a shock when you cannot even find a single user willing to try your product for free. A product which is low capital to build can be very high capital to sell because you need an enormous marketing budget to even get one real user to try your product long enough to realize that it's 10x more efficient than what they're using now. Then there might be a ton of additional regulatory barriers standing in the way of a sale (esp. B2B). Massive chicken and egg problem. These kinds of situations where sale becomes a total bottleneck and stands in the way of delivering economic efficiency can make one feel that the economic pie must be shrinking fast.
And increasingly all economic activity revolves around a handful of megacorps siphoning up all available money, with everyone else trying to insert themselves somehow into the siphoning process. Ideally "as a Service", ie by creating their own little siphon and attaching it onto their hos^H^H^Hcustomer.
Not just software businesses either, but because everyone has been conditioned into spending half their waking time staring at their little screens, traditional businesses too are expected to have an online presence and so carry their share.
I think capitalism based on a hard-money system with a small government with 0% income and sales taxes would be better than what we have now. Private moneys and cryptocurrencies would be allowed and encouraged (not having income or sales tax would greatly aid adoption IMO as it would remove the need for accounting for tax purposes). Import tariffs would be the only acceptable taxes.
Given the current state of technology, I also think a communist or socialist system with some limited ownership rights (e.g. a family would be allowed to own the house they live in and a single small business) could work too. Corporations would be state-owned, passive shareholding would be outlawed.
I think either approach would be way better than what we have now.
I would add property taxes to the list. The root of many gvt evils stem from income tax, sales tax and property tax.
I find the opposite. Almost every business is a unique mix of requirements and theres usually few if any existing perfect solutions.
Businesses often don't know that they are overpaying for one service or another, or are doing something in an extremely expensive manner.
The best sales engineers look at a business, sell a product that saves their customer a significant amount of money, taking a slice for themselves.