The project I'm working on has evolved over the years into something I can no longer feasibly accomplish alone. I truly believe the idea is solid, but that's worthless without being able to go from zero to one.
The best I can do is hack together tiny glimpses of the final vision. As a solo founder with no track record, pitching a concept for a product that has high funding requirements with no hope of revenue until late-stage is virtually impossible.
Years ago I reasoned the only way I'd get off the ground is to launch something and get organic traction. Despite my best efforts to delude myself into believing the contrary, that seems to have proven correct.
If anything, thinking too big for your own good is tantamount to a mental prison of sorts. You just become obsessed with an idea that has a significantly lower chance of being realized. Hence why your snowball advice is on point. :)
That's very interesting. Thanks so much for the answer.
From all the work you've done on it, if you really think outside the box, is there some single facet that could potentially be turned into do-one-thing-well?
The product is ultimately n-facet, with each facet relying upon the same underlying core technology and principles.
There's three conceptualized facets. Two of them are relatively easy to implement from a technical perspective, but are otherwise rendered very difficult by non-technical considerations. The facet I believe to have the widest appeal is paradoxically far harder to implement than the others in all respects.
I think I'll take your advice and either try simplify an existing facet with laser-focus, or perhaps think far outside of the box and hopefully come up with something that's both stupid-simple yet feasible to implement. Something that gains traction while acting as a proof of concept at the same time.
That's true, and while there is a huge benefit to having co-founders there's also drawbacks (e.g. time spent on recruitment and vetting, potential drama down the road, less equity for employees, a fractured vision). In my situation, that time and energy is likely better spent pushing forward.
Regardless, I should have qualified that statement by saying that a sizable team is required at a minimum to ship anything resembling a final product. It's far beyond what a few co-founders could accomplish together.
I have some ideas that probably fit that description. But does the "lean startup" concept still not fit? In other words, is the MVP feasible alone, developed to a point where it can be announced and tested by real users, and possibly gain popularity and possibly income, and ultimately facilitate the necessary growth?
No. My only shot at completing a user-facing MVP with no funding would be to either think up an entirely new facet that requires far less work and is congruent with existing plans, or somehow trim down an existing facet. Otherwise I'm just stuck pitching concepts.
The best I can do is hack together tiny glimpses of the final vision. As a solo founder with no track record, pitching a concept for a product that has high funding requirements with no hope of revenue until late-stage is virtually impossible.
Years ago I reasoned the only way I'd get off the ground is to launch something and get organic traction. Despite my best efforts to delude myself into believing the contrary, that seems to have proven correct.
If anything, thinking too big for your own good is tantamount to a mental prison of sorts. You just become obsessed with an idea that has a significantly lower chance of being realized. Hence why your snowball advice is on point. :)