Commodity, contender, or conqueror?
I love working for a conqueror, but not for why you think
I’ve been thinking a lot about the intersection of quality and effort lately.
More and more products enter the market each year, but very few seem to make a big splash or shake up the category they enter or disrupt. The sheer volume of new entrants should put the odds in their favor, but rarely works out that way.
And I think it ultimately comes down to the effort that goes into the product (or service) - most do “just enough”, but that’s exactly why they also end up as a commodity in the space instead of a contender or conqueror.
Sponsor: Storylane
Most interactive demos suck. They're too long. Too complicated. Too detailed. Too zoomed in. So I go back to Charlie Munger's famous quip: "Invert, always invert" to take what I DON'T want to happen (aka the above) to understand what I DO want to happen.
➡️ Market the pain, not the pill
If an ICP prospect is on my website, I want to convert them from web visitor > qualified pipeline
Here's how I'd use an interactive demo like Storylane to do that when a prospect hits a product or use case page:
1) Have the prospect select the pain they feel the most from a short list of options (if you know your market + product well, you shouldn't have more than 2-4 max)
2) That selection sets off an interactive demo experience related to that exact pain point, starting with a short blurb explaining the specific pain (shows your audience you *know* them)
3) Don't overwhelm them. Beauty lies in simplicity. Take them through a short workflow of your product that shows how their pain is solved. This shouldn't take more than 60 seconds to get through.
4) Have an ending visual that illustrates the before/after. It could be a table, a graphic, etc. The main thing is to help them see the gap between current state and ideal state.
This is one of many interactive demos we’re starting to build. The possibilities are endless - what will you build?
Commodity = low effort, “good enough” quality
With access to knowledge and education over the past ~30 years significantly increasing as a result of the internet, markets have exploded with new entrants seeking to claim their slice of the pie. Now with the rise of AI and “vibe-coding” tools, the number of new entrants is going to grow exponentially yet again.
Having a unique idea and executing upon it used to be a competitive edge. Now anyone can. And this is why we’re going to be flooded with countless commodity-level products. Minimal effort can now get you into the arena.
They’re “good enough.” They get the job done - no more, no less. They aren’t expensive.
I don’t see any macro impact happening to the markets they serve. More options to choose from, sure, but many will be lost in the noise. Most that fall into the commodity range will engage in a race to the bottom with their pricing as the only way to differentiate themselves and acquire new customers. But these same customers that they acquire will churn as soon as another option comes around that’s even cheaper than they are.
The commodities will simply copy what the conqueror has been doing and hope that they can win some of their customers. They won’t know why they’re copying what they’re copying. They won’t have an underlying business strategy seeking to truly improve the market they sell to. They’re there to try to make a quick buck, fighting over a very small slice of the pie with hundreds, if not thousands before long, of other options.
So despite the massive volume of options in the space (left image below), the total marketshare that these commodity products will capture will be very small (right image below).
Tactical marketing example: ad campaigns, email sequences, etc.
You see these everywhere.
The ads in your feed that blend in with all of the others. Blue backgrounds. Some over-inflated ROI stat. A stock photo. A product screenshot.
The countless emails in your inbox that sound like every other one. A bad attempt at “personalization” by referencing where you went to school. A cringey “break up” email after you didn’t respond to the previous 4 they sent.
This is checkbox marketing. The items are being completed and you’re “showing up,” but not in any compelling way to the market.
Contender = moderate effort, decent quality
The contenders will be a unique group. This will be made up of new + existing products who are driving the industry forward, as well as legacy players from the space who are relying on their existing reputation to keep them in the conversation.
To be a contender, you aren’t just checking the “good enough” box and shipping the same thing every other company in the space is. You’re doing a little bit more, whether that’s within the product itself, with your marketing, with your customer experience, and so forth. This little bit more is more effort being put forth. And this is where products and companies will start to separate themselves in this new age.
Effort has always been a variable separating companies in the market, but it’s going to become even more noticeable. I’m not saying these companies need to have employees putting in 80+ hour workweeks as a display of effort. I’m saying these companies will be the ones who put more thought into what they’re doing. What are the second- and third-order effects of the decisions we’re making? How can we separate ourselves from all of the commodities in the space?
While I wish this weren’t true, the number of contenders will be significantly smaller than the commodities simply because they are willing to put in that extra 10% of effort. And this will show in the total marketshare that this smaller subset of companies will be able to capture.
Significantly lower volume of companies putting forth the extra, moderate effort (left image below), but the total marketshare that these contender products will capture will be 3-4x larger than what all of the commodity products cover (right image below).
Tactical marketing example: interactive product demos
It’s easy enough to throw a canned demo video on the homepage and check that box. Where the contenders take that a step further is by building interactive product demos that cover any number of items.
Various features of their product. Specific use cases being solved. A new customer onboarding flow. A common customer support issue troubleshooting overview.
Nothing groundbreaking here, but is enough to separate you from all of the commodity options.
Conqueror = high effort, high quality
The conquerors will be an exclusive group. This will be made up of new + existing products who are obsessed about their market and the problem they’re solving for.
To be a conqueror, the effort here isn’t tied to how many hours are being worked. It’s related to the intensity of the work being done.
We’ve all seen the Founder/CEO who’s obsessed with the problem they’re solving. Not only are they relentless in their pursuit of building the best product available, but it’s fun for them. The effort isn’t hard or a struggle - it’s something they get fulfillment in pursuing. And this will show in the quality of the product.
It’s not simply “good enough,” it’s perfect.
They aren’t using jargon when they talk to you, they’re using your language.
When something goes wrong or breaks, they fix it and do right by you afterward.
They aren’t worried about the prospects they’re missing out on because they’re “too expensive” compared to all of the commodity options, their vision is what the commodity options will be copying.
There will only be 2-3 conquerors. There are only so many Founder/CEOs who are obsessed with solving this problem AND willing to persevere through what it takes to get to operating a company at this level. “Professional CEOs” who are brought after the founder to “increase margins” or “improve stakeholder relations” aren’t conquerors. They aren’t obsessed with the market and the overarching problem. That’s why so many companies sit at the thresholds between commodity/contender and contender/conqueror, but never quite able to make the jump into the next tier.
The total marketshare that these conqueror products will capture will be the same size as commodity + contenders combined, but being only split between 1-3 conquerors in total (right image below).
I’ve been lucky enough to have worked for two Founder/CEOs with the conqueror mindset - Matt Chambers here at Loxo, and Chris Walker while I was at Refine Labs. I’ve also worked for and with “professional CEOs,” so I’ve been able to feel the difference that makes within the entire company.
After experiencing this, and as I continue in my career, I refuse to ever work for a company that doesn’t have this type of leadership. It’s far too much fun to be a part of, and it’s the products + services that truly change the world.
Tactical marketing example: the CEO committing to posting 100 reasons why the category they’re creating is going to replace a legacy category that’s stopped evolving
It’s going to take a long time to complete, but Matt has committed to seeing this through. The best part? He came up with the idea and goal all on his own. Marketing didn’t need to prompt him to do it. This is what I’m talking about when I said find a CEO who is obsessed about their market and the problem they’re solving.
He posts these on LinkedIn (here’s an example of one) and we use turn those into individual blog posts (example from said LinkedIn post) + roll them up into a series that contains all of them.
Book quote of the week
“I am an entrepreneur and a mentor. Over the past twenty years, I have started and worked on and with dozens of start-ups and have seen both successes and failures. I love building companies that change people’s lives for the better, and nearly always I start with the PROBLEM. If the problem is big and worth solving, then in my mind this is already an interesting company and a journey worth taking.”
- Fall in Love with the Problem, Not the Solution, by Uri Levine
In case you missed these this week
"Aren't you in sales and shouldn't like marketing?"
See you next Saturday,
Sam