MVP vs MSP

MVP - Minimum Viable Product

MSP - Minimum sellable Product

The above ideas are critical for a startup on what to build. The dilemma for a startup is how much cash to burn in getting the first thing completed. MVP typically is that piece of the product that solves a particular problem completely and perhaps even the most efficiently.

But MVP does not necessarily mean customers will buy it. An MSP on the other hand has revenue focus from the word go. It is focused on getting the first paying customer and you build something until someone is willing to pay for it.

MSP is in that sense less idealistic and more pragmatic.

The question that comes next is which is more expensive to build. There is no easy standard answer. Either of them could be costlier. But the MSP agenda ensures that the product development is 'outside in', customer focused , differentiating and value delivering. MSP agenda also brings in an in-built cost control that the product development needs to be cost efficient and viable within the revenue it brings.

If MSP is so intuitively correct, why is it not practiced as often?

For starters, it focuses/limits your product development to a specific market segment instead of appealing to a broader market. This also limits the number of  early adopters in that segment who need to buy your product/offering. Your product could be ahead of time, not different enough or not enough 'wowing'.

But atleast it prevents a dogmatic entrepreneurial pursuit with no sense of cost /current market relevance.

As someone said famously ' War is fought with bullets and not money. But someone has got to  buy the bullets!'

Every startup's vision of changing the world costs money and someone has to pay for it to keep it going!