How do you differentiate between users with potential and 'hijack users'?

Users with potential use the product in interesting ways that could lead to future value and should be studied. Hijack users, on the other hand, create no value and may actively decrease the product's value or harm the network. Examples include streaming illegal content or using platforms for illegal activities.

Can paying users still be 'hijack users'?

Yes, paying users can still be 'hijack users' if their activities are harmful or unintended, such as using Airbnb for illegal drug parties. Even if they generate revenue, the associated risks like property damage or legal trouble can outweigh the financial benefit, especially if they are not contributing to the product's core goals.

When is it okay to remove users from your platform?

It is crucial to remove users who are actively harming your business or network, even if they are paying. This applies especially if their activities are illegal or counterproductive to the product's intended purpose and roadmap.

What is the best strategy for dealing with user feedback?

The best strategy is to focus on solving one core problem exceptionally well for a specific group of people. While exploring interesting new use cases experimentally is fine, never let 'hijack users' dictate your product roadmap or steer you away from your primary mission.

Why is having an opinion about your product important?

Having a clear opinion about your product prevents it from becoming a diluted mess that attempts to solve too many problems poorly. This opinion guides the product roadmap, ensuring you focus on creating value for a specific user base rather than being pulled in too many directions by diverse user demands.

Key Moments

Users You Don't Want by Michael Seibel

Y Combinator

Science & Technology4 min read7 min video

Nov 28, 2018|38,164 views|755|11

YC Y Combinator Michael Seibel Essay Advice Users You Don't Want Podcast Craig Cannon

Save to Pod

Key Moments

TL;DR

Startups often embrace every user, but 'hijackers' who misuse products can destroy a business, even if they pay.

Key Insights

A spectrum exists for users, ranging from those using a product as intended to 'hijack users' who actively decrease a platform's value.

Justin.tv experienced 'hijackers' streaming illegal content, which paradoxically led to the idea for Twitch by identifying a valuable niche of video gamers among these users.

Users consuming excessive customer support without generating commensurate revenue, or engaging in illegal activities like drug parties (hypothetical Airbnb example), are hijack users.

Paying hijack users can be particularly deceptive, creating a conflict when deciding to remove them because they contribute revenue.

Focusing on solving one specific problem well is a bet on making a small group of users very happy, whereas accommodating all users leads to solving many problems poorly.

Startups must have a strong opinion about their product and not let users dictate the roadmap, especially 'hijackers.'

The danger of taking every user when starting out

Many early-stage startups, driven by the desire to find product-market fit, adopt a 'take every user' mentality. They have a clear idea of the problem they want to solve and aim to attract as many users as possible who experience that problem. However, this open-door policy often leads to attracting a wide variety of individuals with diverse needs and intentions. Some of these users may attempt to 'hijack' the product, repurposing it to solve problems that the founders did not intend, which can be detrimental to the startup's vision and growth.

Hijacked products and the fine line between malicious and valuable misuse

Michael Seibel recounts how Justin.tv, initially designed for livestreaming one's life, was significantly 'hijacked' by users streaming illicit content like stolen copper and. This misuse, while problematic, unexpectedly revealed a valuable user segment: video gamers. This observation was crucial, as it eventually led to the development of Twitch, demonstrating that not all unintended uses are purely negative. The key lies in distinguishing between users who exploit the platform for destructive purposes and those whose non-intended use might reveal new, valuable opportunities. This spectrum requires careful observation to identify potential diamonds in the rough.

Classifying users on a spectrum of intended use

Seibel categorizes users into a spectrum. The ideal user engages with the product as intended, validating the business model. Next are users who employ the product in interesting ways that hold potential for future growth; these users, like the gamers on Justin.tv, warrant close study. Then come users whose current non-intended use offers short-term value but lacks long-term viability, such as the copper streamers who contributed to ad revenue but not sustainable user engagement. Finally, at the most concerning end are 'hijack users.' These individuals not only derive no value but actively decrease the platform's worth, potentially harming the network through their actions, which can range from taking up excessive customer support without proportional revenue to engaging in illegal and damaging activities.

The deceptive nature of paying hijack users

A particular challenge arises when hijack users are also paying customers. This financial contribution can cloud judgment, making it harder for founders to justify removing them. Seibel highlights how the revenue generated can create a sense of obligation or a reluctance to alienate a paying customer, even if their activities are harmful. In such cases, startups must override this discomfort and prioritize the long-term health of the product over short-term financial gains from problematic users, cutting ties decisively even when it's financially difficult.

Identifying and removing value-destroying users

Startups often struggle to recognize and address 'hijack users' because the discourse typically focuses on users who provide some form of value. Seibel argues that actively identifying and removing these users is crucial, as they pose a greater threat to the business than they offer in benefits. This includes users who consume disproportionate customer support resources relative to their revenue generation, or those whose activities, like hypothetical drug parties on Airbnb, could lead to legal trouble and damage property, thereby diminishing the platform's overall value and reputation. These users must be actively managed out.

The strategy of focused problem-solving versus broad appeasement

The core bet for a successful startup is making a small group of users extremely happy by solving one specific problem exceptionally well. Conversely, attempting to cater to every user who walks through the door, including hijackers, leads to a diluted product that attempts to solve many problems poorly. This approach can result in a roadmap dictated by the broadest and often least valuable user demands, rather than by a focused vision. Startups should prioritize their core value proposition and the users who genuinely benefit from it, rather than allowing hijackers to steer product development.

Maintaining a strong product opinion

Ultimately, building a strong product requires founders to have a clear opinion about what their product is and who it is for. Seibel cautions against a passive 'I don't know, whatever the market takes it' mentality. While experimentation and catering to some evolving use cases are acceptable, allowing a product's direction to be dictated by users who are actively harming the business or using it in unintended, value-destroying ways is a recipe for failure. Founders must assert their vision and manage their user base accordingly.

Mentioned in This Episode

●Software & Apps

●Companies

Identifying and Managing Undesirable Users

Practical takeaways from this episode

Do This

Study users who are using your product in interesting ways with potential.

Focus on solving one core problem really well.

Have a strong opinion about your product's intended use.

Explore potential new use cases experimentally, but don't let them dictate the roadmap.

Avoid This

Accept every user blindly when starting out.

Allow hijack users, who create no value or actively harm your network, to dictate your product roadmap.

Let users who are using your product for unintended, illegal, or harmful activities control your product's direction.

Try to solve too many problems; this leads to a poor experience for everyone.

Common Questions

Hijack users are those who exploit a product for unintended purposes, creating no value and potentially harming the network or brand. While sometimes these users can reveal new opportunities (like gamers on justin.tv leading to Twitch), often they actively detract from the product's core value and can steer the roadmap in detrimental directions.

Topics

Risk Management Mindset & Self-Improvement Technology & Innovation Business & Entrepreneurship Product Development Startup Strategy User Acquisition Market Fit Customer Management

Mentioned in this video

Companies

Airbnb

Used as a hypothetical example to illustrate how 'hijack users' (those hosting illegal drug parties) could harm the platform despite generating revenue.

Twitch

A platform that originated from recognizing the potential in video gamers who were initially considered 'hijack users' of justin.tv.

Justin.tv

A past platform built to allow people to livestream their lives, which was later hijacked for unintended uses.