The graveyard of good products is full. Most of them weren't bad — they were invisible. The founders built something real, then waited for the world to notice. Here's why that never works, and what to do instead.
Most products that fail don’t fail because the product was bad. They fail because the person who built it spent all their time building and none of it thinking about who would buy it, why they’d buy it, or how they’d find out it existed.
This is hard to hear because building is satisfying and marketing is ambiguous. You can see when code works. You can’t see whether your positioning is right until you try to sell something and nobody shows up.
The “build it and they will come” idea is persistent because it lets us do the comfortable thing (building) and defer the uncomfortable thing (figuring out if anyone actually wants what we’re building and can be reached). Smart people fall for it constantly. I’ve fallen for it.
The sequence that works is: understand the customer first, then build. Not understand them vaguely, not assume you understand them because you’ve met a few people like them. Really understand who they are, what problem they’re already trying to solve, where they go to solve it now, and what would make them switch.
This doesn’t mean you need months of research before you ship anything. It means that before you go deep on execution, you should be able to answer five questions clearly and specifically. If you can’t, you don’t know enough yet.
Marketing first doesn’t mean running ads before you have a product. It means doing the thinking about positioning, messaging, and audience before you commit to a specific execution path.
Positioning is the answer to “what is this and who is it for.” Messaging is the answer to “why should that person care.” Neither of these is an ad. Both of these have to exist before an ad can work.
The businesses that get this right do the positioning work first and then let the product shape itself around that clarity. The businesses that get it wrong build a product they’re proud of and then try to figure out the positioning afterward, at which point they usually discover that what they built doesn’t match what anyone was looking for.
“Small business owners” is not an answer. “Freelance graphic designers with 1-5 clients who are currently tracking projects in spreadsheets” is an answer. The more specific you are, the easier it is to find them, talk to them, and write copy that feels like it was written just for them. Specificity isn’t limiting. It’s the thing that makes everything else easier.
The keyword there is “already trying to solve.” You don’t want to create awareness of a problem. You want to be the solution to a problem they already know they have and are already spending time or money trying to address. That’s a much easier sale.
This is the trust question. Credentials, track record, case studies, a clear explanation of how it works — something needs to exist that gives a skeptical person a reason to believe the product does what it says. “We help businesses grow” is not that. Specifics are.
If your customer currently uses a spreadsheet, a competitor’s product, a consultant, or a manual process, you need to know that. It tells you where to find them, what language they use to describe the problem, and what you’re actually competing against. You’re not just competing against direct competitors. You’re competing against the status quo.
People switch solutions when the pain of staying is greater than the cost of changing. Understanding what that threshold is, and what it takes to clear it, is the core of positioning. If switching costs are high, you need to offer something dramatically better. If they’re low, a modest improvement is enough.
The cheapest way to find out if your product idea is real is to try to sell it before you build it. A waitlist, a pre-order, a consulting engagement, a beta offer at a discount — any of these reveals whether real people will put money toward the thing, not just say they would if you asked them nicely.
People are polite. When you ask “would you pay for this?” most of them say yes. When you say “here’s a link to buy,” you find out the truth. The validation test is the link to buy, not the question.
Even with great positioning, you need a way to reach people. There are two kinds of channels: ones you own and ones you rent. An email list is owned. Your Instagram following is rented. Organic search traffic from a solid site is mostly owned. Paid ads are rented.
Rented channels are fine for acceleration, but building a business entirely on a rented channel is fragile. Algorithm changes, policy updates, and rising CPMs can cut your distribution overnight. The businesses with staying power are the ones that invested in owned channels early, even when it was slower.
Whatever you build, figure out your owned distribution channel early. Email list, community, organic content — pick one and build it from day one, not as an afterthought.
Know who you’re for. Know what they need. Know why they’d trust you. Know where to find them. Know what it takes to get them to switch. Build for that, not for your vision of what they should want.
The products that succeed aren’t always the best products. They’re usually the ones that were marketed to the right people in the right way at the right time. The product matters, but it’s table stakes. Marketing is the variable.
I wrote this as a full guide covering the framework, the five questions in depth, how to run the validation test, and how to apply it to any product or service, digital or physical.
Get Marketing First here.
If you’re building something and you’re not sure it’ll sell, this is where to start.
Marketing First: Why Most Products Fail and What Actually Gets Customers
$40
