To be truly contrarian, find what's becoming the new "consensus playbook" among startups and bet against it. DoorDash chose a simple marketplace model when competitors were pursuing the trendy but complex "full-stack" ghost kitchen model, which ultimately proved to be the right decision.

Samesh Dash of IVP passed on DoorDash because he couldn't reconcile its negative gross margins with its valuation. This highlights the venture dilemma of choosing between a visionary founder with a massive vision and the harsh reality of current, unsustainable unit economics during a heavy investment phase.

Deliver's growth stagnated until they shifted from complex, variable fees to a simple flat rate. This treated pricing not as a billing model but as a product feature that solved the customer's core need for financial predictability, which became their primary growth catalyst.

A seemingly ideal B2C partnership with DoorDash failed due to a poor customer profile (frugal drivers, high urgency). This failure was the catalyst for pivoting to B2B fleets, which dramatically increased their average order value from $800 to $4,000 and improved operational efficiency.

The decision to offer zero-commission trades was not an incremental price reduction; it was a fundamental shift in the business model. The team intuitively recognized that "free" possesses a unique marketing power far stronger than a nominal fee. This is key for any company aiming for mass-market disruption.

While competitors viewed capital as a strategic weapon, DoorDash focused on capital efficiency. Their goal was to be twice as effective with every dollar spent on customer acquisition. Lin emphasizes that capital is fuel, but it's useless without a 'fire burning'—a product with real engagement.

The market often misjudges companies like DoorDash by focusing on the high-level service (food delivery) while missing the massive, compounding value created by its obsessive focus on fine-grained logistical details. These small, chained-together improvements create a powerful, hard-to-replicate moat over time.

Instead of creating a market expansion strategy from scratch, ServiceUp explicitly copied the playbook of DoorDash, a successful three-sided marketplace in an adjacent vertical. This involved entering a new city and simultaneously acquiring customers, suppliers (shops), and drivers, accelerating growth.

While massive "kingmaking" funding rounds can accelerate growth, they don't guarantee victory. A superior product can still triumph over a capital-rich but less-efficient competitor, as seen in the DoorDash vs. Uber Eats battle. Capital can create inefficiency and unforced errors.