If the Idea is So Good, Why Hasn't Anyone Done It Yet

"If the Idea is So Good, Why Hasn't Anyone Done It Yet?" — Deconstructing the Sceptical Investor's Chief Myth

Dear investors, partners, colleagues.

This question is asked so often it should be included in startup textbooks. It seems lethally logical, disarming, and causes many founders to falter. But let's examine it: is it really that valid? I argue that this question is not a perceptive remark, but a classic logical trap that prevents one from seeing real opportunities.

Here is why the "others haven't done it" argument is fundamentally flawed.

1. The Fallacy of the "Omniscient Market"

This argument assumes the market is an omnipotent, all-knowing entity that instantly identifies and implements all viable ideas. But that is not the case.

Large companies with billion-dollar revenues are not agile startups; they are huge ships. They have their own strategic priorities, established business models, bureaucracy, and, crucially, inertia. They do not "jump" on every new idea because:

    They protect current revenue streams: Why risk an existing, profitable business unit for an unproven idea? This is known as the "innovator's dilemma."

    They have different KPIs: The R&D department of a large company is focused on improving existing products, not on seeking revolutionary breakthroughs that could render their own products obsolete.

    They simply don't see it: Their gaze is fixed on major competitors and obvious trends. Niche but promising markets often fall outside their radar.

Example: Why did Kodak, despite having digital photography technology, not kill its own film business? Why didn't Blockbuster create Netflix? They were giants, but their resources and vision were directed elsewhere.

2. The "Blind Spot" Effect Regarding Success

Business history is a graveyard of ideas that were "lying in plain sight" but went unnoticed until that one daring individual appeared.

    Dropbox: Before it, there were FTP and USB drives. The problem existed, but everyone considered it solved. Dropbox offered a brilliantly simple solution.

    Airbnb: Hotels always existed. Renting out apartments did too. The idea of connecting them via a platform seemed obvious... but only in hindsight.

    Uber: Taxis were everywhere. Everyone had phones. But the idea of hailing a car in two minutes via an app seemed crazy at first.

These companies didn't invent the wheel. They looked at an old problem in a new way. The assertion "if the idea were good, it would have been implemented already" ignores the very essence of innovation—it's often not about creating something from scratch, but about a novel combination of existing elements.

3. Resources ≠ Vision and Motivation

"Companies with billions" have resources, but a startup has something they lack: focus, hunger, and speed.

    A startup is a mission. For the founder, it's a life's work. For a manager in a corporation, it's one of 10 projects this quarter.

    A startup is agile. It can make decisions in a day, change strategy in a week. A corporation will spend months coordinating budgets and specifications.

    A startup is hungry. It fights for survival. A corporation fights for quarterly reports to shareholders.

Resources are important, but without the right vision, passion, and speed, they are lifeless. This is precisely why giants often don't create but instead acquire grown startups.

4. Synergy and the Uniqueness of the Approach

Perhaps someone is "doing" something similar. But the key question is: are they doing it the same way?

Our project is not just idea "X". It is idea "X + Y + Z", where Y is our unique technology, and Z is our business model or targeting of a specific audience. Even if there are large players in the market, they do not offer the unique cocktail of advantages we have created. We are not coming to the field to play by their rules; we are creating a new game.

So, what should we focus on? A reminder of what truly matters.

By asking "why haven't others done it?", we reduce a complex world to a binary choice of "good/bad". This is a logical fallacy—an argument from ignorance. The absence of evidence (a realized idea) is not evidence of absence (of its potential).

Instead, I propose focusing on the concrete evidence we already have:

    The Business Plan: It contains numbers, calculations, market analysis, and a concrete go-to-market strategy. It's a mathematical model, not a philosophical debate.

    Financial Forecasts: They show how the idea translates into profit.

    The Marketing Strategy: It explains how we will capture our market share, even if competition exists.

    The Team: That's us. Our experience, our competencies, and our determination are the "secret sauce" that a corporation cannot copy.

    The MVP or Pilot Projects: We already have initial results that validate our hypotheses.

Conclusion

The question "Why haven't others done it?" is a relic of a mindset based on finding reasons to say no. The mindset of a true investor should be based on finding reasons to say yes.

We are not asking you to believe in the idea because no one has implemented it. We are asking you to evaluate our work—the very package of documents where we have laid out in detail how we will implement this idea and why we will succeed where others saw no opportunity or lacked the courage to act.

Let's discuss not the hypothetical reasons for failure, but the concrete paths to success outlined in our business plan. That is where the true value for an investor lies.