HitForge, a new twist on incubators
Naval Ravikant, who in his past life co-founded Epinions and Vast, has started HitForge, a San Francisco-based outfit that is a unique twist on the incubator model.
HitForge is an entrepreneur cooperative composed of independent small teams, where people can apply with their ideas, join the team, and see their idea go from idea to product in a few weeks, largely with help of an offshore engineering team.
If it works, then the product is turned into a company. If it doesn’t work, the product is killed, and the team moves onto something new. HitForge is out of a few thousand dollars. The team whose product got killed still gets to share in the hits that come out of the cooperative, Ravikant says.
Ravikant argues that the start-up creation model – have an idea, start a venture, raise capital and then release a product – might have worked in the past, but now it doesn’t, at least when it comes to consumer web start-ups. In the world of consumer Internet start-ups, only the hits win. Today while it takes less capital to start and launch a company, it doesn’t necessarily mean it is going to be a hit. As Ravikant says, “Web businesses are unpredictable despite the best of intentions and execution.”
“What these are, are products that needed to be tested out in the market before becoming a company,” says Ravikant. Only the hits should become companies, since hits are the only ones that get consumer adoption, and have some sort of an exit event. Hedge funds use this “momentum investing” philosophy, and so does Sequoia Capital, that has done well by betting on growth.
The concept is very similar to that of Ev Williams, who has established Obvious to try out new web products, spinning out the ones that show sufficient adoption into companies — as he did last week with Twitter.
Others will argue that the smaller projects being snapped up by Google and Yahoo shows that it’s about hitting singles, not home runs. But like in baseball, it is the homers that fill the stadia and line the pockets. HitForge hopes to take the two approaches and mash them up with current industry trends – offshore developments, using Amazon S3 and EC2 services, open source, and new web marketing strategies.
Ravikant, when we met with him said,”Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled engineers yearning to code.” We thought he was joking. Instead he was dead serious. “But that’s how I feel about engineers with great passion who can’t raise money, usually because they were born in the wrong country or under the wrong circumstances. I want to create an abstraction layer that allows them to be entrepreneurs.”
Will it work? I am no expert on this, but given the success of YCombinator, it has a fighting chance. When thinking about this over the weekend, I remembered a similar experiment was tried in the music industry in the 1990s. Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis created a hit factory that churned out R&B hits by the dozen and gave us stars like Janet Jackson. In England, Stock Aitken Waterman did the same and brought to us musical acts like Kylie Minogue. But there was Sonia, Sabrina, and Samantha Fox.
So question to all the readers: you think this twist on incubator model is going to work?
Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

They had better have a good management team. I can see the environment becoming chaotic with all the different projects and hungry engineers.
Sadly, they are restricting themselves to technical founder applicants only, it seems non-technical people cannot be entrepreneurs…
I’m going to veer towards no, but I really like the idea.
It feels the concept turns the key intangible elements of new venture creation into commodities, and focuses only on building products.
I agree. Technical skillsets alone cannot make a product. What about the rest?
Are these the same bunch of folks who had a fight with their investors in the previous venture? I can see a trend here. What is it baiting/leeching?
This anyways looks like a ripoff of cambrianhouse.com
Stay away from all these amateurs and do it on your own. You’d be better off.
I think this model of “Web site/app Publishing Companies” is going to become a main stay of the industry. With the low costs of turning an idea into a web service, a LOT of crap comes to the market and to rise above the crowd, start-ups need credibility. If a big name publisher is behind the company, it automatically gets a lot of press and has a better chance of catching on. For example, if Obvious Corp were to release any new web service, it would doubtlessly be on top of Techmeme with loads of people writing it up. The same wouldn’t happen if CompanyXYZ were to release the exact same web service since they wouldn’t have the credibility.
I think this is the same model used in the videogame industry.
I really like this idea. Clearly placing lots of small bets and seeing which ones pay off is the way to go.
My only question is how the various engineers will integrate, if at all. Is HitForge building a team like Obvious who create products and then spin them off into separate companies? Or is it a constantly changing group that enters and exits as projects are finished?
What’s also not clear is whether HitForge has the management side in place. As another commenter mentioned, there needs to be at least a few business types in there to complement the hackers.
Naval Ravikant is hardly a nobody. By bringing his expertise into the product i think we have a scheme to generate some very interesting products.
Don’t knock this as a back-of-the water effort by any means.
Om: While more options for more innovators (of all strips, backrounds, experience, specialty, etc) is always a good thing; SFGary is correct.
On the one hand, if a coder/programmer proficient guy/gal (or team) can write their own app; given today’s super low costs of getting “the thing” on the web; what do they need HitForge for?
Then on the other hand, since they; apparently, from what their website says; only want submissions from the programming folks, anyone with a great idea who’s looking for app writer/creators need not bother contacting them.
Frankly, their site reads more like a job board for coders than it does for innovators.
While their “everyone shares” approach absolutely sounds like a great additional option for the marketplace; were I them; I’d instead invite anyone with a great idea to submit it to them (with the full knowledge that such IP-unprotected submissions come with some risk to both parties); approached from the standpoint of “you bring the idea, if we like it, we’ll build and launch it for you at no upfront cost, and we all share if it takes off.”
That’s the kind of approach that’ll bring them the home runs they’re looking to create.
This is even worse than the Y-Combinator scam. This isn’t a scam but it’s like socialistic entrepreneurship. Incubators didn’t work in the past and they won’t work today.
The revolutionary entrepreneurs aren’t going to be interested for two reasons:
Real entrepreneurs don’t design free me too consumer apps that add little value to the world (e.g. Y-Combinator companies, social networks, etc.)
Real entrepreneurs do it to win big. If you just want to get rich, you go work at a hedge fund, not join an incubator where even if your me too product fails, you can share in the success of another one.
Do you really consider Obvious a success? Twitter is thriving in the Echo sphere and no one outside it cares.
I’m amazed at how much attention on TechMeme, GigaOm, and TechCrunch is dedicated to worthless start-ups that are easy-to-replicate, violate IP, have no real technology or value, etc.
Om – at least you do some real stuff. Can you differentiate yourself from the fluff on TechCrunch a bit please?