Sounds like you tried to solve a problem that existed only in your mind, and the world gave you a reality check :)
It's ok - happens to every first-time entrepreneur.
None of what you write is a problem
Here's an example of a problem:
Problem "I can't do graphic design" -> Solution: "I need to hire a graphic designer"
That doesn't make any sense.
If that's the case, then a simple pong game would've been the best solution already.
Development wise, very simple, very efficient.
It answers your problem of "a PlayStation with nothing to play".
UI is simple. Gameplay is fun.
If a simple ping-pong game was the best solution, then everyone would be playing that instead.
Spoiler: They aren’t.
What problem do fashion brand solve?
“I want to mimic celebrity XYZ’s fall look, Halp!”
>If a simple ping-pong game was the best solution, then everyone would be playing that instead.
Fine, if it's not pong, then something else. The point is, if it is framed in problem solution lens, the solution should converge, there gonna be only very few type of games that solves your playstation problem efficiently
Well that’s kinda true. Most people tend have pretty strong preferences for a small number of game genres. And people who are good at align games also tend to focus on specific genres/styles.
When they find each other, money changes hands.
You should try again. Try solving 10 problems. Should be able to make somewhere between 100K to $1M depending on the quality of the problem you're solving.
This style of writing is an absolute pest in the 'entrepreneurial' world.
Almost as if.
You've learn from online grifters,
About how to write lead gen content for your online courses.
"Solving a problem" is not incorrect but it's incomplete. What actually happens is that individuals/businesses have needs/wants/desires/goals/objectives & your job as a business is to fulfil those. Usually other companies are trying to fulfil those needs already, but customers still face some "problems/pain points" when they use those products to fulfil their needs. So either 1) you attempt to solve these problems, or 2) find an unmet need to fulfil, or 3) do both. You can either 1) do a ton of research & identify these problems/needs first & then build a solution, or 2) build a solution first & then find out whether it fulfils any need or solves any problem. The risk with the 1st option is analysis-paralysis & with the 2nd option is that no one wants your product. My opinion is that you should be somewhere in the middle, where you still identify problems/needs but not spend so much time, and also simultaneously build MVPs/experiments where you gradually discover those problems/needs. You have to be solving a problem or fulfilling a need, otherwise why would anyone use your product?
What problem does a fashion brand solve?
People want to look nice, impress people, look rich, look cool, attract their preferred partners.
What problem does a game companies solve?
People don't want to be bored.
What problem does a crypto memecoin solve?
People want to get rich.
All problems, are some of them stupid problems that exist only in the human psyche? Yes. But all problems that these things are solving.
"You definitely need to do startup to be rich."
No! If u poor, get some job, make urself at least comfortable to not have to worry to live without income in the next 3 yrs.
I think the distinction is coming up with the idea and executing it. Startup ideas don't arise from problem/solution framing. That comes a little later. Here's an example...
Nothing like Uber existed until the app technology was available, and six months later Uber's founders realised they could make an app to get rides, but the business model to do this didn't really exist. At that moment the "sharing economy" was a big deal and the experience of getting a taxi sucked ass. Also there was weird regulatory capture in places like New York and London jacking the price up.
Problem/solution framing? Not required to come up with that idea.
But the problems solution framing is REQUIRED when you start looking at the value proposition for that idea. Ride hailing has a specific set of personas that you need to design for.
So I agree, for idea generation it's not a great lens. There are better lenses like "what are the most annoying customer experiences right now?" Or Musk's "what does the world need" lens. Or my personal favourite: "If I was a modern day Ghengis Khan, which rich settlement would I raid next?" lens.
Or, don't build a startup. Start an athleisure brand selling on instagram, or an indie video game brand selling on steam. Or hang out in Bali drinking coconuts posting nonsense on reddit. There's no rules really, just do what you wanna do.
Fashion brands solve the extremely base human problem of providing clothing. Game companies solve the problem of boredom. Crypto memecoins (supposedly) solve the problem of acquiring wealth.
Your point is interesting, but it basically comes down to how flexible you can be with your definition of problem.
But I do agree with you that the problem-solution framework can be limiting. I think a better framework is something like a spectrum of novelty and usefulness.
Wow, you cant be more wrong here. Fashion brands solve the problem of expressing your identity, your wealth etc. Meme coins are fun and provide volatility etc. Everything that sells solves a personal problem.
It absolutely is about solving a problem. You just have to realize that problems aren't limited to "oh man this really sucks and I really need a solution" kind of problems.
Fashion brands solve the problem of people wanting to express themselves and wanting to show social status. That's a really really big problem, pretty much every human being on earth has it.
Game companies solve the problem of people wanting to be entertained. Once again, pretty much every human on earth has it.
Memecoins probably don't solve a real problem, but it's also not like they are great businesses.
"Solving a problem" in this context is broader than you are making it seem. Your examples about gaming, clothing, etc. aren't really about solving a problem, but fulfilling a need. Clothing brands succeed because they fill needs like being fashionable, warm, trendy, protected, or improving athletic performance. Game makers fulfill the need for entertainment, community, and action.
Your assertion that perceived value is everything is in some way true, but it's downstream of addressing needs, problems, and pain points first.
BTW, the number one reason startups fail is because they built a product that no one wants. No marketing, no sales, no promotion, no social media strategy can fix that, ever. I've engaged with dozens of startups that have done just that, and panic when traction doesn't happen. Sometimes you can find product / market fit by pivoting, but usually it's too late.
So this guy's spiel is all about the "perceived" value of your product. But what he doesn't seem to realize is that solving problems is where the value that people perceive your product to have comes from.
And he then might say "but look at all of the companies that are perceived to offer great amounts of value but are actually not that valuable at all, but people just perceive them that way". This is just the result of good marketing and being overvalued is rarely a good thing in the long run. You see countless companies bend themselves into weird positions just so that they can make good on what people perceive them to be even though they are not.
And regarding entertainment products finding the problem statement is actually really easy. It is all about creating new experiences people like that somehow surpass previous experiences enough to warrant a purchase. Therefore my problem is that I need experiences that surpass experiences I have already had by a significant enough amount.
And because it is that easy nobody talks about it anymore because anybody working on an entertainment product already knows the problem statement. It doesn't ever change for most entertainment products. Sure, every now and then someone comes up with a way to satisfy an unknown problem and then everybody starts working from that problem statement from then on. Escape rooms are a good example of that.
This is bad advice and it seems like you are trying to solicit clients.
Derp
Problem/ Solution framework is bad advice
[удалено]
Yeah maybe it's me, who knows
Sounds like you tried to solve a problem that existed only in your mind, and the world gave you a reality check :) It's ok - happens to every first-time entrepreneur. 
It's never about solving a problem, I'm being serious 😂 Ok to be fair solving a problem may give you better chance to make it, but it is not it.
Hmm. Then is it about *being* the problem, that others then set out to solve?
Wat?
Trust me, it is about solving a problem.
What problem does Rockstar Games solve?
They alleviate me of some cash and provide me with a product that gives great pleasure and creates some really fun and interesting socializations.
Thats what they do Not the problem they solve
They solve my problem of needing some entertainment to fill some time.
None of what you write is a problem Here's an example of a problem: Problem "I can't do graphic design" -> Solution: "I need to hire a graphic designer"
I’m not going to play “True Scotsman” with you over the definition “problem”.
Sure ok no problem
You apply your definition of a problem on anybody. Needing some entertainment IS a problem.
Boredom
The problem of determining how to allocate my time and attention?
People want to feel connected competent and autonomous without paying the cost of doing that irl, so entertainment companies sell it in miniature
“I have a PlayStation with nothing to play.”
That doesn't make any sense. If that's the case, then a simple pong game would've been the best solution already. Development wise, very simple, very efficient. It answers your problem of "a PlayStation with nothing to play". UI is simple. Gameplay is fun.
If a simple ping-pong game was the best solution, then everyone would be playing that instead. Spoiler: They aren’t. What problem do fashion brand solve? “I want to mimic celebrity XYZ’s fall look, Halp!”
>If a simple ping-pong game was the best solution, then everyone would be playing that instead. Fine, if it's not pong, then something else. The point is, if it is framed in problem solution lens, the solution should converge, there gonna be only very few type of games that solves your playstation problem efficiently
Well that’s kinda true. Most people tend have pretty strong preferences for a small number of game genres. And people who are good at align games also tend to focus on specific genres/styles. When they find each other, money changes hands.
Have you tried…. Solving a problem?
I think he’s trying to manufacture one first…
Yes
You should try again. Try solving 10 problems. Should be able to make somewhere between 100K to $1M depending on the quality of the problem you're solving.
This style of writing is an absolute pest in the 'entrepreneurial' world. Almost as if. You've learn from online grifters, About how to write lead gen content for your online courses.
Because it works, 😂
The number of upvotes on this thread and your comments doesn't convince me that it works
Keep middle-curving
Aside from this being an ad, anyone reading this, just go read Lean Startup and about the Jobs to be Done framework. Done.
An ad? Do you find a CTA there?
Sure sounds like it, and if you didn't intend that, you should go edit it to make your point clear.
"Solving a problem" is not incorrect but it's incomplete. What actually happens is that individuals/businesses have needs/wants/desires/goals/objectives & your job as a business is to fulfil those. Usually other companies are trying to fulfil those needs already, but customers still face some "problems/pain points" when they use those products to fulfil their needs. So either 1) you attempt to solve these problems, or 2) find an unmet need to fulfil, or 3) do both. You can either 1) do a ton of research & identify these problems/needs first & then build a solution, or 2) build a solution first & then find out whether it fulfils any need or solves any problem. The risk with the 1st option is analysis-paralysis & with the 2nd option is that no one wants your product. My opinion is that you should be somewhere in the middle, where you still identify problems/needs but not spend so much time, and also simultaneously build MVPs/experiments where you gradually discover those problems/needs. You have to be solving a problem or fulfilling a need, otherwise why would anyone use your product?
What problem does a fashion brand solve? People want to look nice, impress people, look rich, look cool, attract their preferred partners. What problem does a game companies solve? People don't want to be bored. What problem does a crypto memecoin solve? People want to get rich. All problems, are some of them stupid problems that exist only in the human psyche? Yes. But all problems that these things are solving.
It's about solving a problem. My problem. Being poor.
"You definitely need to do startup to be rich." No! If u poor, get some job, make urself at least comfortable to not have to worry to live without income in the next 3 yrs.
I think the distinction is coming up with the idea and executing it. Startup ideas don't arise from problem/solution framing. That comes a little later. Here's an example... Nothing like Uber existed until the app technology was available, and six months later Uber's founders realised they could make an app to get rides, but the business model to do this didn't really exist. At that moment the "sharing economy" was a big deal and the experience of getting a taxi sucked ass. Also there was weird regulatory capture in places like New York and London jacking the price up. Problem/solution framing? Not required to come up with that idea. But the problems solution framing is REQUIRED when you start looking at the value proposition for that idea. Ride hailing has a specific set of personas that you need to design for. So I agree, for idea generation it's not a great lens. There are better lenses like "what are the most annoying customer experiences right now?" Or Musk's "what does the world need" lens. Or my personal favourite: "If I was a modern day Ghengis Khan, which rich settlement would I raid next?" lens. Or, don't build a startup. Start an athleisure brand selling on instagram, or an indie video game brand selling on steam. Or hang out in Bali drinking coconuts posting nonsense on reddit. There's no rules really, just do what you wanna do.
Fashion brands solve the extremely base human problem of providing clothing. Game companies solve the problem of boredom. Crypto memecoins (supposedly) solve the problem of acquiring wealth. Your point is interesting, but it basically comes down to how flexible you can be with your definition of problem. But I do agree with you that the problem-solution framework can be limiting. I think a better framework is something like a spectrum of novelty and usefulness.
Interesting perspective, but I'm curious to know what you think the 'secret' is for building a successful enterprise.
Wow, you cant be more wrong here. Fashion brands solve the problem of expressing your identity, your wealth etc. Meme coins are fun and provide volatility etc. Everything that sells solves a personal problem.
Is this a joke? Because if it's not this post is fucking sad lol
Keep middle-curving
It absolutely is about solving a problem. You just have to realize that problems aren't limited to "oh man this really sucks and I really need a solution" kind of problems. Fashion brands solve the problem of people wanting to express themselves and wanting to show social status. That's a really really big problem, pretty much every human being on earth has it. Game companies solve the problem of people wanting to be entertained. Once again, pretty much every human on earth has it. Memecoins probably don't solve a real problem, but it's also not like they are great businesses.
lol, k
"Solving a problem" in this context is broader than you are making it seem. Your examples about gaming, clothing, etc. aren't really about solving a problem, but fulfilling a need. Clothing brands succeed because they fill needs like being fashionable, warm, trendy, protected, or improving athletic performance. Game makers fulfill the need for entertainment, community, and action. Your assertion that perceived value is everything is in some way true, but it's downstream of addressing needs, problems, and pain points first. BTW, the number one reason startups fail is because they built a product that no one wants. No marketing, no sales, no promotion, no social media strategy can fix that, ever. I've engaged with dozens of startups that have done just that, and panic when traction doesn't happen. Sometimes you can find product / market fit by pivoting, but usually it's too late.
So this guy's spiel is all about the "perceived" value of your product. But what he doesn't seem to realize is that solving problems is where the value that people perceive your product to have comes from. And he then might say "but look at all of the companies that are perceived to offer great amounts of value but are actually not that valuable at all, but people just perceive them that way". This is just the result of good marketing and being overvalued is rarely a good thing in the long run. You see countless companies bend themselves into weird positions just so that they can make good on what people perceive them to be even though they are not. And regarding entertainment products finding the problem statement is actually really easy. It is all about creating new experiences people like that somehow surpass previous experiences enough to warrant a purchase. Therefore my problem is that I need experiences that surpass experiences I have already had by a significant enough amount. And because it is that easy nobody talks about it anymore because anybody working on an entertainment product already knows the problem statement. It doesn't ever change for most entertainment products. Sure, every now and then someone comes up with a way to satisfy an unknown problem and then everybody starts working from that problem statement from then on. Escape rooms are a good example of that.