Since a few days, I have been developing a philosophy that when it comes to a product, you have to compress the time to value and time to effort.
If something has 10 steps to get the thing done, how can you make it in just 2 or 3 steps? If something takes 10 minutes of time to get done, how can you make it happen in just 2 minutes? If something takes 10 steps and 15 minutes to complete, how can you make it happen in just 1 step and 15 seconds?
But then I realized that all of this is narrowing down onto a single point, and that is instant gratification. And there I realized how pervasive this strategy actually is. Google is instant gratification for your curiosity. Facebook is instant gratification for your social instincts. Reels is just instant gratification for your boredom. Games are instant gratification for your tendency to seek adventure and thrill. Apps like DoorDash are instant gratification for getting the food you want, or even Uber is instant gratification for finding taxis. All of them have compressed the time to value and effort to value and have started providing us with instant gratification.
The strategy becomes: What is a recurring problem that winners are facing? And how can we solve it in such low time to value and effort to value that it becomes instant gratification? And if someone is already solving the problem, how do we collapse the time and to value even further.
As we have discussed, “winner” means anyone who has a pocket big enough to pay us for the convenience we create for them. And the more recurring the problem that we are solving, the better, because then the winners need us even more. If a problem is such that we can provide instant gratification for it, the barrier to entry falls down a lot. Something like ERP requires a lot of investment of time and efforts, and the payoff is also later down the stream. So it’s not something a solo guy can do because people don’t believe in your longevity. On the other hand, if you are building something which has instant gratification, people trust you with it because, “Hey, what’s the risk? It is going to get it done soon.”
In the same way, the longer-term bonds naturally have higher yield than lower-term bonds. Because the longer you hold the money, the higher the risk. And the same way, the longer you take to deliver value, the more trust it takes. If you’re the stranger on the internet, I would rather lend you money for one day than for one year. Same way, if you’re a random guy on the internet running a SaaS, I would rather pay you for software that gives me value in just 5-10 seconds than something that would take months’ worth of efforts.
Same way I would trust a random restaurant on the side of the road to provide me with a quick meal than trying to cook it on my own. But would I really trust him to handle the catering for an important event in my life where I need to feed a lot of people? It’s all relative. The value provided fits certain people in certain contexts.
Table from grok:
| Context | Low-risk / Instant Gratification (Roadside stall) | High-risk / Long-term Value (Catering big event) |
|---|---|---|
| Typical TTV | Seconds to minutes | Weeks to months/years |
| Risk tolerance of buyer | Very low (“What’s the worst that can happen?”) | High (“This could damage my reputation/career”) |
| Trust required upfront | Minimal (prove it now) | Substantial (references, track record, guarantees) |
| Who pays easily | Individuals, impulse buyers, early adopters | Teams, enterprises, risk-averse decision-makers |
| Barrier to entry for founder | Very low (solo-friendly) | High (needs credibility, team, funding runway) |
| Retention driver | Habit + repeated instant wins | Proven long-term ROI + relationship |