The sad thing is that the Samwer brothers are real people who actually do this, and they're quite successful at it too: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-02-29/the-germany-...

I don't see it as sad at all. Limiting the target audience is a perfectly legitimate way of starting an MVP business. When they copy the idea, they apply huge amounts of process and local business knowledge (local laws, relationships, etc), which they then sell for profit. Everybody wins.

I'm surprised they're not revered, given the popularity of the claim that ideas aren't worth anything, and that it's about execution.

I guess the problem for a lot of people is, sometimes the samwers clone the execution too. In some cases even down to typos in the HTML source

html and css source is not execution. Getting distribution, partnerships, sales, etc. right is execution, especially since they don't clone tech-intensive companies (or at least not the tech-intensive parts)

why is that sad? Silicon VAlley claims ideas are worthless and execution is everything, until someone actually copies their idea.

I think there is a difference between copying an idea and improving on an idea.

A good example of this would Google who made a better search engine even though the idea of a search engine wasn't an original idea in it self, they just made a better one. Hence; execution.

Well, I'm not Silicon Valley. I just don't like the concept of simply copying someone else's idea as a business model, because you're piggybacking on someone else's idea, and it's uncreative.

I wonder what is your opinion about barbers, shop-owners, car manufactures or basically any business outside of the internet. I think that there's big difference between copying the business model and the product/service itself.

It's more copying a company, its business model, idea, everything down to the fine details that bothers me. Not so much copying a business model or an idea.

Obviously a parody, but it underscores a historical trend of overseas investors pouring money into clones of US companies without any substantial innovation or changes.

One question I'm struggling with... Is a clone a legitimate (abstract) business if the differentiator between clone and U.S. original is the experience working with European / Asian customers and catering to their needs specifically?

He's making fun of the Samwer brothers, which would mean he probably doesn't think clones are legitimate business.

That much is obvious. Not asking him. Asking the HN crowd.

Haha, great little parody.

Timing of it may have something to do with our little stunt yesterday: http://ncombinator.com

do you regret calling it NCombinator? Seeing as you could have avoided slipping into this clone mindset or does it not really matter to you guys?

Doesn't really matter. Our goal was to get some early attention. Once we build the community up we can change the name and turn it into something real.

Right now it's just an idea and the only platform we had to generate the sufficient early interest was a ridiculous name and launch.

If YCombinator thought globally, Z Kombinator wouldn't have a chance in the first place ;-)

With a German American background, I hear that like someone with a strong accent mispronouncing the word "the" as "zee". It adds another dimension of humor for me.

As a German-American: you mean like "sie"?

Um, not really what I was thinking. To me that sounds less harsh/strong than what I had in mind.

I guess it depends. I am imagining a very harsh accent. Some folks in my family pronounce ich like "ish", others closer to "ick" and then some do a more gutteral sound like you find in loch (a la loch ness monster). So, uh, maybe.

Where is Z Hacker News?

what the ....