Everyone has competitors, including spreadsheets and doing nothing. What matters is why you win a specific segment, and what stops a copy.
12 min read · Level 2
Your real competitor is almost never the company you are watching. It is the spreadsheet, the intern doing it by hand, and above all the decision to change nothing — which wins more deals than any rival product. And most early "moats" are head starts wearing a costume. Being honest that your advantage is focus and domain knowledge, and naming what real defensibility would look like, is more convincing than claiming a moat nobody believes.
Your competition is whatever the customer does instead of buying from you. That includes direct competitors, adjacent products, a spreadsheet, an assistant doing it manually, and doing nothing at all.
Defensibility is whatever makes it hard for someone to copy you once it is obvious you are working.
Because 'we have no competitors' reads as either not having looked or not understanding the market, and it is one of the fastest ways to lose an investor's confidence.
And because a market with no competitors usually means no demand. Competition is evidence that people pay for this.
The scheduling tool's real competitive set:
So the positioning writes itself: for firms too big for a spreadsheet and too small for enterprise software.
On defensibility, honestly: the features are copyable in three months. What is not: deep workflow knowledge from six years in the industry, and — later — the network effect once carriers and firms are both on the platform. That second one is real defensibility. The first is a head start.
First-time founders often list only direct competitors and miss the ones that actually win the deals: the spreadsheet and inertia. Most lost deals go to 'we decided not to change anything', and if you have not planned for that, you will lose them repeatedly without understanding why.
The second mistake: claiming defensibility you do not have. 'Our technology' is rarely a moat. Being honest that your current advantage is a head start, and naming what real defensibility would look like, is far more credible.
Direct products, adjacent tools, manual processes, hiring someone, and doing nothing.
From interviews, not assumptions. The answer is usually more boring than you expect.
Not everyone. The specific group for whom the alternatives are worst.
Usually a head start, focus and domain knowledge. Those are real but temporary.
Network effects, switching costs, proprietary data, distribution lock-in, brand. Which could you build, and by when?
During validation, when writing positioning, and before any pitch.
Do not over-analyse competitors before you have customers. Ten customer conversations beat a forty-page competitive matrix at this stage.
Investors treat this as one of the strongest negative signals in a pitch, because it means one of two things: the founder has not looked, or nobody pays to solve this. Every product competes with something, and in most B2B categories the incumbent is a spreadsheet with an owner who is quite attached to it.
Name the spreadsheet, name doing nothing, then say why you win a specific segment. That reads as market knowledge, not modesty.
Figma's durable advantage — multiplayer collaboration in the browser — was not a feature that could be copied in a quarter, but it also was not defensible on day one. Early on the company's real advantage was a technical bet others considered impractical, and the moat accumulated as teams standardised on it.
State honestly that today's advantage is a head start, and name the defensibility you are building toward and by when. Nobody believes a day-one moat.
Create a free account to read the rest and apply it to your own startup.