Is it difficult to start a tech company.

mariaalice · 13-01-2021 10:33am #1

How difficult is it to start a tech company? and make it successful?.

listermint · 13-01-2021 10:34am

Very,

.thanks.

EndaHonesty · 13-01-2021 10:34am

It's so easy, I can't be bothered to do it...

ednwireland · 13-01-2021 10:34am

easy if you have the smarts, the money and the ability

and a 10 or 20 year slog until you get to a point where you can sell it

mariaalice · 13-01-2021 10:48am

Twitter, Instagram, Youtube, and the like basically any information-sharing platform have made their founders billionaires in a very short time, so could someone found a system that could replace them.

ShyMets · 13-01-2021 10:53am

Easy. A few power cables, rubber bands, desks and chairs and you can have 10000 jobs in Longford in the morning

SouthWesterly · 13-01-2021 10:55am

ednwireland wrote: »

easy if you have the smarts, the money and the ability

and a 10 or 20 year slog until you get to a point where you can sell it

I was in a company who were in business 10 years and had 5 staff. The economy hadn't recovered and they crashed after being unable to sell.

Atlantic Dawn · 13-01-2021 10:57am

This industry moves so fast it's really hard to tell. That's why you need a name that's cutting-edge, like CutCo, EdgeCom, Interslice.

cms88 · 13-01-2021 10:59am

Well in my experience the likes of Enterprise Ireland etc will just trow money at anything that's even remotely ''tech''. I've seen it myself businesses that have no cusomets etc just an 'idea'' yet have been able to go on for a few years just based on gtants etc

Valhallapt · 13-01-2021 11:01am

If you have to ask, probably not a good idea to start one

mariaalice · 13-01-2021 11:05am

Valhallapt wrote: »

If you have to ask, probably not a good idea to start one

Trump has been effectively de-platformed could another 'twitter' emerge and give him an outlet.

seamus · 13-01-2021 11:06am

mariaalice wrote: »

Twitter, Instagram, Youtube, and the like basically any information-sharing platform have made their founders billionaires in a very short time, so could someone found a system that could replace them.

A lot of these platforms are pure luck.

For every Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Insta, there are 1000 entrepreneurs who pumped months into building an almost identical site/platform that just never got the traction. Some of it is about having the money & connections to push the platforms out.

Sometimes it's pure luck that the public chooses to use yours. The one that becomes popular often isn't the best one, the fastest, the easiest to use or the most clever. The trend just picked it and everyone ran with it.

TikTok became popular because hundreds of millions in Chinese money was spent marketing it.

If you're looking to make money in tech, a social media site is not the way any more. If you do come up with a good idea, one of the big players will steal your idea and do it better than you in a fraction of the time.

The money now is in finding ways either to change a traditional industry into a technology-first model - like Revolut - or identifying existing technologies that can be made a lot better - like Stripe.

mariaalice wrote: »

Trump has been effectively de-platformed could another 'twitter' emerge and give him an outlet.

That was already tried. A platform called "Parler" set itself up on the basis that it wouldn't censor people like Twitter does, and it became very popular with conservatives and bigots for a while.
Parler was pulled down after it became clear that the platform was being used to incite and organise violence.

There's a fairly constant rule in public platforms that Parler missed; To maintain a healthy "melting pot" of voices, you have to carefully moderate the content. If you don't, eventually bias creeps in as one point of view begins to dominate and all of the others leave. In particular, completely unmoderated platforms always end up with nothing but racism, violence and child porn.

PhilOssophy · 13-01-2021 11:07am

Easy to start any company.
Hard to be successful.
Also it can be hard to decipher what attracts people to some companies / platforms. Zoom is a perfect example, it had absolutely no USP yet once Covid hit, a previously unheard of platform was a world-wide brand. In spite of Skype, Google Hangouts, etc having been in that market for years.
Revolut is another good example, and now the banking sector here is trying to come up with a counter-plan to go head-to-head, but Revolut might just have too much of a foothold in the market?
Another good example is Microsoft and their browsers, no matter what they do people don't want to know about Edge.
Sometimes, it is just a bit of luck that a tech company needs.
What are you trying to do with this company OP?

listermint · 13-01-2021 11:08am

mariaalice wrote: »

Trump has been effectively de-platformed could another 'twitter' emerge and give him an outlet.

Was waiting for this

Knew it from the first post.

PhilOssophy · 13-01-2021 11:11am

listermint wrote: »

Was waiting for this

Knew it from the first post.

Any company that would hang their name, reputation, etc on Trump right now, would need their head examined.

B.A._Baracus · 13-01-2021 11:13am

mariaalice wrote: »

Twitter, Instagram, Youtube, and the like basically any information-sharing platform have made their founders billionaires in a very short time, so could someone found a system that could replace them.

Something will replace Twitter, Instagram, Facebook and Youtube.
Facebook took Bebo and MySpace market share. There was actually another video sharing website a few short years before YouTube but most of the world didn't have broadband connections / decent connections at the time.

The problem is the companies that will replace are in fact one in a billion. Their stars will align right. Like there are thousands of Facebook clones out there by people who had the same idea of being the next Facebook. They weren't.

It's Survivorship bias - We only look at, or even hear, those who are successful. But we never hear of the thousands (more even) who fail.

So to answer your original question of is it hard? - it is extremely hard. However, should you not try then it is impossible. But most of the companies that will become the next big internet thing have millions invested in them to grow. Again, Survivorship bias that we could focus on those three ex-google employees who set up YouTube from their garage.

mariaalice · 13-01-2021 11:14am

listermint wrote: »

Was waiting for this

Knew it from the first post.

It interested me. I would also be wondering how come so many of the companies emerge from California and to a lesser extent, China why not Iceland for example or why did Vine fail but Snapchat takes off? They are interesting questions.

D3V!L · 13-01-2021 11:19am

I started a cloud services company in my shed with 3 other like minded people. We have an amazing product but for some reason no one will take us seriously.

If anyone here is interested you can contact me directly at d3v!lsuperhypercompuglobalmega.net

Valhallapt · 13-01-2021 11:21am

mariaalice wrote: »

It interested me. I would also be wondering how come so many of the companies emerge from California and to a lesser extent, China why not Iceland for example or why did Vine fail but Snapchat takes off? They are interesting questions.

Initially a very competitive venture capital ecosystem, willing to fund these experiments in the hope that one of their investments goes big. We don’t really have that in Ireland, Enterprise Ireland poisoned the eco system.

seamus · 13-01-2021 11:24am

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

The problem is the companies that will replace are in fact one in a billion. Their stars will align right. Like there are thousands of Facebook clones out there by people who had the same idea of being the next Facebook. They weren't.

I had a family friend once get in touch with me to see if I could help him set up a social media site.

I asked for more detail of what he was thinking and it was, "Like Facebook...but for Yoga".

Facebook Pages were a thing at this point, so I asked him if that's what he was looking for, but he was insistent that no, it had to be its own site for Yoga people to join up and add their friends, etc etc. I explained it wasn't simple, but it was doable, however he needed to go off and have a proper think about what he wanted, how it should look, how it works, etc, before it can be built.

I never heard from him about it again.

beerguts · 13-01-2021 11:33am

If it is a new social media site that you are planning op there are examples of ones that are reasonably successful. I use goodreads quite a bit for book reviews and chatting to people with similar interests (sadomatist movement in 1920s imperial Japan. Pre tojo guidelines specifically ðŸ˜‚).
However a lot of the niche ones that would be popular already have options already so it might be hard to get yours noticed if it doesn't have unique features. If that is what you intend

irishgrover · 13-01-2021 11:36am

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Any company that would hang their name, reputation, etc on Trump right now, would need their head examined.

not really, ignoring the morals, there is a big potential market in American racists

ohnonotgmail · 13-01-2021 11:39am

seamus wrote: »

I had a family friend once get in touch with me to see if I could help him set up a social media site.

I asked for more detail of what he was thinking and it was, "Like Facebook...but for Yoga".

Facebook Pages were a thing at this point, so I asked him if that's what he was looking for, but he was insistent that no, it had to be its own site for Yoga people to join up and add their friends, etc etc. I explained it wasn't simple, but it was doable, however he needed to go off and have a proper think about what he wanted, how it should look, how it works, etc, before it can be built.

I never heard from him about it again.

I bet they wanted you to do all the work for no pay as well.

AlmightyCushion · 13-01-2021 11:42am

D3V!L wrote: »

I started a cloud services company in my shed with 3 other like minded people. We have an amazing product but for some reason no one will take us seriously.

If anyone here is interested you can contact me directly at d3v!lsuperhypercompuglobalmega.net

The cloud? Ha ha ha, look at this caveman still doing things with the cloud. That's yesterday's news, grandpa. It's all about AI and blockchain. Pivot to a blockchain AI company or an AI blockchain company and you be rolling in it.

AlmightyCushion · 13-01-2021 11:44am

seamus wrote: »

A lot of these platforms are pure luck.

For every Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Insta, there are 1000 entrepreneurs who pumped months into building an almost identical site/platform that just never got the traction. Some of it is about having the money & connections to push the platforms out.

Sometimes it's pure luck that the public chooses to use yours. The one that becomes popular often isn't the best one, the fastest, the easiest to use or the most clever. The trend just picked it and everyone ran with it.

TikTok became popular because hundreds of millions in Chinese money was spent marketing it.

If you're looking to make money in tech, a social media site is not the way any more. If you do come up with a good idea, one of the big players will steal your idea and do it better than you in a fraction of the time.

The money now is in finding ways either to change a traditional industry into a technology-first model - like Revolut - or identifying existing technologies that can be made a lot better - like Stripe.

That was already tried. A platform called "Parler" set itself up on the basis that it wouldn't censor people like Twitter does, and it became very popular with conservatives and bigots for a while.
Parler was pulled down after it became clear that the platform was being used to incite and organise violence.

There's a fairly constant rule in public platforms that Parler missed; To maintain a healthy "melting pot" of voices, you have to carefully moderate the content. If you don't, eventually bias creeps in as one point of view begins to dominate and all of the others leave. In particular, completely unmoderated platforms always end up with nothing but racism, violence and child porn.

Even money and connections don't guarantee success. Look at Google Plus. It was a better product than Facebook (at least in my opinion) and had Google's weight and resources behind it and it still flopped.

irishgrover · 13-01-2021 11:53am

I've been involved in a number of different tech startups in a number of different countries (US and Ireland) in the 90's. It was very very hard work and an incredibly great crack.
I made 1.2million when I was 26

, I lost 1.16milion when I was 27

.
I also got badly burned (6 figures) when I was 32 and had a mortgage and 2 small kids.
None of these companies still exist. Some were bought out by bigger companies, some went bankrupt.
I gave up being a risk-taker when child #3 and #4 arrived. I am now a boring corporate whore but I can pay my mortgage. Am turning 50 this year, I think there might be one more mad bastard risk-taking effort left in me.

Mimon · 13-01-2021 11:56am

ednwireland wrote: »

easy if you have the smarts, the money and the ability

and a 10 or 20 year slog until you get to a point where you can sell it

Heard a commentator saying that this should not be the goal for successful Irish tech companies.

If we ever want to be on the same level as silicon valley we should be holding onto them and growing them to be giants.

Suppose tempting to get a 10s of millions buy out but we should be more ambitious than this as an end goal.

Ubbquittious · 13-01-2021 12:07pm

9 out of 10 fail.

I am trying to start one myself. Mainly because if I were to spend the rest of my days working for a boss without having tried starting one I will end up kicking myself

Am under no illusions about the thing. If by the end of the year Im able to eke a living out of it I'll call it a success. Highly doubt I'll ever be a millionaire from it and I need to do a pile of work over the coming months to get to that point.

The Tetrarch · 13-01-2021 12:11pm

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Any company that would hang their name, reputation, etc on Trump right now, would need their head examined.

How about setting up a public relations company to improve Trump's image?

zom · 13-01-2021 12:21pm

mariaalice wrote: »

How difficult is it to start a tech company? and make it successful?.

..and then sell it for pile of gold to some of internet moguls and party till the end of my life

For Forks Sake · 13-01-2021 1:09pm

irishgrover wrote: »

I made 1.2million when I was 26 , I lost 1.16milion when I was 27 .

You either bought a football club, or a racehorse

For Forks Sake · 13-01-2021 1:10pm

The Tetrarch wrote: »

How about setting up a public relations company to improve Trump's image?

Mission : Impossible

Ubbquittious · 13-01-2021 1:41pm

The Tetrarch wrote: »

How about setting up a public relations company to improve Trump's image?

Maybe build a pocket sized cold-fusion reactor first just to get you warmed up for the challenge

10000maniacs · 13-01-2021 2:11pm

It all depends on the idea. If the idea is original and people like it, then here is where the good look kicks in. You need good luck even if you have a great idea.

ednwireland · 13-01-2021 2:18pm

SouthWesterly wrote: »

I was in a company who were in business 10 years and had 5 staff. The economy hadn't recovered and they crashed after being unable to sell.

worked in an internet startup late 90s early 00 went bust in 01. ran my own sole trader company for a few years closed in th 08 crash. worked since the for a niche tech company and we were sold last year twice got a few quid out of the first sale. (nothing to write home about but nice to get !)

Brendan Flowers · 13-01-2021 3:02pm

10000maniacs wrote: »

It all depends on the idea. If the idea is original and people like it, then here is where the good look kicks in. You need good luck even if you have a great idea.

This is something I would completely disagree with it. You dont need to have an original idea to start a company. In fact if another company is doing the same thing and are profitable, its actually reaffirming the potential of the business. More important then an original idea in my opinion is to be able to execute an idea brilliantly.

As for the OP's question, is it difficult to start a tech company? How long is a piece of string? Because I could throw together a website in a couple of hours and put some articles on it. Separately I could also spend the next 2 years working on a prototype of a SaaS and then start licensing it to companies. Both could be considered tech startups, but with very different costs, amount of time required, etc

riclad · 13-01-2021 4:07pm

Many tech companys make no profit,
the goal is once you have a large no of users google or facebook will buy the company.or just make an app ,theres a free version ,for extra features theres a paid version.
the usp of zoom was its free ,its easy to use,.you dont need to be a tech expert to use it.no one is going to make a new version of twitter.
its hard to think of an original idea that is not already on the app store.
no one knows what will be the next tik tok or zoom that will get millions of users.chrome and firefox work fine, its hard to think of a reason to use
edge browser,

ApplyLiberally · 13-01-2021 7:44pm

mariaalice wrote: »

How difficult is it to start a tech company? and make it successful?.

Why tech?

How difficult is it to start a fashion company?
Surely it's just picking fabrics, cutting them in different shapes and colours and a bit of sewing.

completedit · 13-01-2021 7:52pm

Very hard now. It was probably a bit easier in the wild west days of the internet but again that's probably an illusion.

Plenty of opportunities in the decades ahead but the chances of actually creating a company that becomes successful are so unlikely. I heard it compared before that nobody born in the lower classes in the 1700's thought that they would one day rise to become part of the Aristocracy but today we have this illusion that we can all become part of the 1% if we just work hard enough and keep hustling. Thought it was interesting. Okay not everyone thinks they can become the next Zuck or Musk but there is that sort of feeling that if you just work at it enough, greatness awaits.

bnt · 13-01-2021 8:35pm

I took part in an “incubator” conference a few years ago, as a technical adviser to the starter-uppers: the #1 thing I took away was “know your market”. It doesn’t matter how wonderful you think your product or technology is, if you can’t find the people who (a) really need it and (b) are willing to pay real money for it. So many tech things these days fall under the heading of “it’s nice, but I don’t need it enough to pay for it”. :rolleyes:

Ush1 · 13-01-2021 8:56pm

ApplyLiberally wrote: »

Why tech?

How difficult is it to start a fashion company?
Surely it's just picking fabrics, cutting them in different shapes and colours and a bit of sewing.

You would need massive amounts of marketing to stand out.

arccosh · 13-01-2021 9:20pm

mariaalice wrote: »

Twitter, Instagram, Youtube, and the like basically any information-sharing platform have made their founders billionaires in a very short time, so could someone found a system that could replace them.

Twinstatube

touts · 13-01-2021 9:26pm

mariaalice wrote: »

How difficult is it to start a tech company? and make it successful?.

Very easy to start a tech company or any company for that. Tech may be slightly easier as there are groups like Techstars who do everything possible to get people to start tech companies.

But successful. Well that's the real difficulty. Any muppet can set up a company. Half the millennials in the country seem to have some side hustle going as an influencer or some such. But being a success. That's a very different story. That takes a great idea and then years of hard work and persistence. And still after all that your luck and timing have to be right.

jimmycrackcorm · 13-01-2021 9:30pm

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

This industry moves so fast it's really hard to tell. That's why you need a name that's cutting-edge, like CutCo, EdgeCom, Interslice.

To be sucessful you only need to have a non-tech company and simply rename to include blockchain.

Aongus Von Bismarck · 13-01-2021 11:37pm

I've moved out of traditional banking, and now work for an investment firm who invests on behalf of clients interested in cleantech, renewable technologies, and bioengineering.

We don't do seed capital investments, so the companies we see have already reached some sort of product development stage. Even then it's obvious how difficult it is to succeed in creating a viable business. There's a huge amount of luck involved, and most of the successful companies will have been founded by people who are already successful. There's also a huge bias towards investment in companies created by graduates of elite universities.

A lot of these early-stage businesses struggle with believing in their core idea, and decide to pivot their product so it includes the latest buzzword or topic de jour. The European investment landscape is filled with former businesses who decided that blockchain was something they needed to include, for example. That has almost completely gone away at this stage, and you'll see a lot of presentations including the word infodemic at the moment. Altruism as well.

Advice - you almost certainly won't be creating a unicorn tech company. Areas to focus on - sustainable agriculture, trades (plumbing!), and services related to heritage and nostalgia.

For Forks Sake · 14-01-2021 12:38am

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

This industry moves so fast it's really hard to tell. That's why you need a name that's cutting-edge, like CutCo, EdgeCom, Interslice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercom_(company)

Meh, close enough

kyote00 · 14-01-2021 1:44am

I have an idea for a spell check app. Think I will talk to EI tomorrow

cms88 wrote: »

Well in my experience the likes of Enterprise Ireland etc will just trow money at anything that's even remotely ''tech''. I've seen it myself businesses that have no cusomets etc just an 'idea'' yet have been able to go on for a few years just based on gtants etc

Capt'n Midnight · 14-01-2021 1:57am

You have to figure a way to convert a billion dollar industry into a one worth a few millions.

Or be a member of the Chumocracy.

Brendan Flowers · 14-01-2021 10:02am

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

You have to figure a way to convert a billion dollar industry into a one worth a few millions.

This in my opinion is a very ill informed notion. Why does someone need to build a company worth a few million for it to be a success? If a person was to start up a company that gave them a salary slightly higher than their current job, with less working hours, would that not be a success? Even if they had a salary slightly less than their current job but less hours meaning a better quality of life, again how is that not a success...

A big reason so many tech start-ups fail is because, while the person (or people) involved in creating it might be geniuses when it comes to coding, they lack the business know-how. They get caught up in the idea that they need to be the next Zuckerburg/Dorsey, want to be funded with 5 and 6 figure sums and then think by throwing money around they'll be a success and create a company worth millions.

smacl · 14-01-2021 10:34am

irishgrover wrote: »

I've been involved in a number of different tech startups in a number of different countries (US and Ireland) in the 90's. It was very very hard work and an incredibly great crack.
I made 1.2million when I was 26 , I lost 1.16milion when I was 27 .
I also got badly burned (6 figures) when I was 32 and had a mortgage and 2 small kids.
None of these companies still exist. Some were bought out by bigger companies, some went bankrupt.
I gave up being a risk-taker when child #3 and #4 arrived. I am now a boring corporate whore but I can pay my mortgage. Am turning 50 this year, I think there might be one more mad bastard risk-taking effort left in me.

Similar enough story though slightly smaller figures. Set up my first company in '89 and second with my then GF later wife in '98 (both software). Sold the 2nd company for just under a million but had debts that ate up a good chunk of that. First company is still going strong, very small at just three people but profitable enough. I really enjoy the craic and do well enough but haven't exactly made a fortune either. No plans on growing the company as 30+ years in I'm well aware that I'm pretty crap at management and have no interest in taking on any more stress. Have had decent enough offers to sell the company but would miss the craic and reckon I'm well past the stage where I could work for anyone else. Mid 50s and could retire whenever I want to, but again no plans to do so.

To the OP, give it a go. Personally, I'd advice get a couple of co-directors where you've got people passionate about sales and marketing as well as the tech and someone with a level head and into finances. Co-directors, like yourself, can live off bread and water for the first year and will most likely have to

Having employees is like having children, lovely and all that but they're a shocking drain on the finances. If you work long hours for a pittance for the first year and are good at listening to what your paying clients want to buy rather than being too concerned about what you want to sell them, you have every chance of making a go of it. If you do, set up a directors pension on day 1, no matter how small it starts out.

PhilOssophy · 14-01-2021 10:44am

Brendan Flowers wrote: »

This in my opinion is a very ill informed notion. Why does someone need to build a company worth a few million for it to be a success? If a person was to start up a company that gave them a salary slightly higher than their current job, with less working hours, would that not be a success? Even if they had a salary slightly less than their current job but less hours meaning a better quality of life, again how is that not a success...

A big reason so many tech start-ups fail is because, while the person (or people) involved in creating it might be geniuses when it comes to coding, they lack the business know-how. They get caught up in the idea that they need to be the next Zuckerburg/Dorsey, want to be funded with 5 and 6 figure sums and then think by throwing money around they'll be a success and create a company worth millions.

This! You are not a failure if your company doesn't make millions. If you make more than you'd make listening to some bs merchant finger waving and ordering you and everybody else around, that is a success.

Is it difficult to start a tech company.

Comments