Regulatory Startups Are Disadvantaged Unless They Helped Write the Law
Mike Maples, Jr. · Mike Maples Jr. - Identifying Startup Pattern Breakers (EP.406) · Sep 16, 2024 · at 28:27
Floodgate co-founder Mike Maples Jr. breaks down the hidden risks of building startups around regulatory changes rather than technological breakthroughs.
0:00 / 0:40exact quote · 40.3s
720p mp4 · rendered on demand · StarZero watermark
“If you're harnessing a regulatory inflection, I hope you were involved in helping that law get written, because very few laws get passed just out of the goodness of people's heart. Usually there's a set of people who are lobbying for those laws. Usually they have a reason that they want to exploit those laws. Ok, if you're going to exploit this regulatory inflection, Why do you have an advantage over the person that was lobbying the legislators to pass that law? Because I bet you they got an angle on this thing. Because living in the future in the sense of a legal inflection would mean that you were involved in writing that legislation somehow. Otherwise, someone else has an advantage in pursuing that future over you.”
quote is from the automated transcript, cleaned for reading: filler sounds and stutters are removed, nothing is rephrased. names can be misheard (the analysis reads context, assessments check outside sources). how →
More from Mike Maples, Jr.
Maples: Startups Win by Being Radically Different, Not Just Better
“So startups never win by being better. Better isn't enough. Better doesn't matter. Only by being radically different can a startup make a radical difference.”
Maples: Startups Without Inflections Cannot Build Radically Transformative Businesses
“Either it embodies an inflection. You just haven't thought about it enough, or it doesn't embody an inflection, which probably means you're solving present pain for present customers for present unmet needs. And you might build a reasonable business doing that…”
Justin Kan Started Atrium for Founder Status Rather Than Legal Passion
“The problem was Justin Kahn wasn't passionate about the legal field. He was starting Atrium largely because he wanted to be a higher status founder, and I really appreciate the fact that he's open about that, so he wanted to be in the pantheon with Patrick Col…”
Breakthrough Early Adopters Buy for Aesthetic Reasons Rather Than Practical Ones
“They believed in an aesthetically different superior future, and that's why early customers move. They move for aesthetic reasons rather than practical reasons. The same reason that people buy art. They buy into the aesthetic vision of the artist.”
Seed Investing Is the Exact Opposite of Buffett's Margin of Safety
“It's like Buffett and Munger talk about your margin of safety when you buy a stock. It was the intrinsic value of the stock higher than the price of the stock. My business is the opposite. My business is margin of asymmetric upside if it works.”