When faced with an existential cost crisis, Ather's founder explored two pivots: a cheaper product and a software platform model. Both were dead ends. The ultimate solution was to resist the distraction of pivoting, stay the course, correct pricing, and fix the core operational issues of the original product.
Related Insights
When pivoting from a product with existing revenue, avoid the binary choice of killing it or splitting focus. Blue Jay successfully transitioned by putting their V1 product into "maintenance mode"—servicing existing customers but halting all new feature development—and committing the entire team to building the V2 for a defined six-month period.
Accel Events thrived by pivoting to a virtual events platform during COVID. However, this new reputation hurt them when the market returned to in-person events. They were no longer seen as a viable in-person solution, forcing another costly product and brand rebuild to recapture their original market.
Ather faced three successive valuation cuts (40%, 50%, 65%) that would kill most startups. They retained their team by being radically transparent about finances, asking for voluntary pay cuts, and building trust by later rewarding those sacrifices with bonuses and equity at the lower valuations.
Deciding to pivot isn't about perseverance; it's a cold, rational decision made when you've exhausted all non-ridiculous ideas for success. The main barrier is emotional—it's "fucking humiliating" to admit you were wrong. The key is to separate the intellectual decision from the emotional cost.
Instead of chasing trends or pivoting every few weeks, founders should focus on a singular mission that stems from their unique expertise and conviction. This approach builds durable, meaningful companies rather than simply chasing valuations.
At $1.5M ARR, Briq pivoted from its successful RPA tool to a forecasting product to satisfy VCs who wanted daily active users. The new product was a disaster and was killed within two years, forcing a return to their proven, automation-focused roots.
Even a company with significant revenue can be stuck in the "problem-market fit" stage if it introduces too much complexity. Pursuing multiple products, ICPs, or go-to-market motions dilutes focus and exponentially increases difficulty, hindering the ability to scale effectively.
Founders often struggle most when a startup has some revenue but isn't scaling predictably. This ambiguity makes the decision to pivot from a partially working model much harder and more painful than starting from a blank slate.
Many founders believe growing top-line revenue will solve their bottom-line profit issues. However, if the underlying business model is unprofitable, scaling revenue simply scales the losses. The focus should be on fixing profitability at the current size before pursuing growth.
