I agree completely. I have a two-step process for managing a portfolio of ideas: 1) develop a set of criteria by which to evaluate ideas so that you can compare them apples to apples, and 2) be rigorous and honest when evaluating your ideas. I use a trello board based on the following "idea funnel": https://www.dropbox.com/s/7zscq79ybhjrxni/Idea_Funnel.png?dl...

Worth noting that ideas aren't worth much without execution: http://nducoff.com/post/128443632/what-you-are-doing-is-not-...

If you can't be dedicated to you idea then why should an investor be dedicated to you? No matter how easy it is to BUILD concepts - you will never get better at EXECUTING if you don't stick with one idea. The ability to sell, stabilize and innovate on a product is much more important then the creation or ideation. People who hop from one idea to another quickly are red flags for investors. Why can't you stick with a product? Do you have poor cofounders? What about future hardships? Will you run then? Being a good programmer is half the battle. The rest is about being a driving force for your cofounders and startup.

I totally agree. You nailed it! And being a driving force for your cofounders and startup with a vision is probably more important than being a programmer. IMHO.

I think it varies from case to case. I wouldn't generalize it.There have been cases where things which started as a side project at a startup have become their main product.

At the same time there have been cases where startups didn't take off because of focusing on too many things.

So I think it's always better to work on complimentary ideas which might blend well together. Working on totally unrelated ideas at the same time would spoil the show. Again, I might be totally wrong too.

do you know any good examples of complimentary ideas?

in terms of unrelated ideas: Max Levchin started Glow and Affirm almost at the same time, Elon runs two companies.

additionally, at the lower level, programming patterns are almost the same.

I was talking about early stage entrepreneurs. Working on multiple ideas once you are successful or have enough experience sounds logical but initially that might be a hurdle.

Check this article for examples. Really good one http://ryanhoover.me/post/98567029388/startup-side-projects

Investors aren't going to want to deal with you if you have a bunch of side things going. If your solo I would say you can work on a bunch of projects until you've found something others want to work with you on it. If you want investors and you have a team you should focus until it's obvious what your working on isn't going to work.

If you find it that easy to build a portfolio of MVPs, you're probably not building meaningful MVPs.

In my view, taking the portfolio approach is a sign of not having enough faith in any one direction.

Entrepreneurs generally have sound visions in a few specific directions unlike VCs who are generally hopeful about a wide variety of stuff but will never bet on a very select few.

but we all know, that most ideas change significantly. if there is enough capacity of the team, why not launching several things? time is the most expensive resource. when you do a problem - solution fit several directions & products can be tried.

everyone has vision, even people who don't start companies. when you start a company you want it to succeed, because 90% of them fail. sticking with one idea doesn't make sense. maybe it was true 10 - 5 years ago. Now there are so many cloud services, which help to roll out things in days instead of months.

Hi all, please, share your opinion.