Share0
Tweet0
Share0
Share0
Tweet0
Share0

Simple B2C vs high-tech B2B: 1-0

I’m the founder of a B2B startup that solves fairly complex problems in a growing industry. The market is young, fragmented and not standardized, the data processing requires sophisticated custom-made algorithms and computational requirements are high. Development is hell and the sell-cycle long, which is straining our finances.

Today I met the founder of a trivial B2C startup, approximately the same age as mine, built with off-the-shelf libraries, which runs on a single server, turns over 10x more than mine and has exponential growth in a few months. I picked a hard battle because I thought that’s where the money is and I now feel like a moron.

Did anybody out there have similar experiences?

  • Start a company for a passion, not for the “quickest” path to success. If you don’t have the passion, you won’t make it through the hard times.

    Reply

    • Passion is overrated and does not pay the bills. Startups should aim at being profitable as soon as possible, even if just “Ramen-profitable”, as Paul Graham once wrote.

      Reply

  • B2C is easier to test ideas since the solutions are often simpler, but its also a whole lot more crowded. It would be akin to buying a lottery ticket, way easier to make money vs a job for those that win, but your odds are much more lower to succeeding than working a job.

    Reply

    • That’s right. I guess that B2B are way more predictable if they address real issues. But then the next ‘Yo’ comes up and one starts inevitably thinking about the nights spent coding complex business applications that will never reach the headlines.

      Reply

  • Every B2C startups will look trivial when we look from the higher level. In fact, it is much harder to find the product market fit with B2C.

    Reply

  • A similar experience I’ve had is encountering people like you whose overblown view of self and misplaced attitude hinders their success. Who the f––k are you to call someone else’s prospering company trivial? The same company whose founder was smart enough to know when to use off-the-shelf stuff + 1 server and focus energy on crucial matters like customer acquisition and revenue, therefore now has 10x your revenue + explosive growth? Since when did B2C mean less than B2B?

    Newsflash: that founder’s startup is harder than yours because they had to not only stand out in a sea of millions of B2C competitors, but excel by achieving exponential growth. Put that in your stunted brain pipe and smoke it.

    Reply

    • Yours is not really a friendly answer. Anyway, I’ve been asked to consult them on issues regarding scalability and architecture, I know their tech stack inside out. Also, they used no ads or marketing, the app is literally selling itself, which something I thought impossible… until I saw it.

      Also, I never meant B2C is less than B2B, I’m actually ranting about my choice of going for a high-tech, complex B2B. Read more carefully the posts before trolling.

      Reply

      • My response still stands: it wasn’t meant to be friendly or unfriendly, just a statement of opinion in response to a post.

        Not trolling, you explicitly called the other company trivial in your post, which clearly shows your condescension.

        Reply

        • You interpreted it as a criticism, whereas I was positively pointing at the fact that a technically trivial app can make more money than a highly complex one. I’m not condescending at all, quite the opposite instead.

          Reply

  • No, you are not alone. The best products don’t always win. Solving a problem isn’t the same as building a company. Most people are lazy and stupid as fuck and no one ever went broke underestimating exactly how much. Signed, a fellow B2B founder.

    Reply
    • {"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}

    You may also like

    >