This Startup Raised $750 Million for Batteries Powered by Rust


In science class, you probably learned that rust forms when iron reacts with water and air. Now a tech startup is turning that same reaction into a battery. Form Energy calls the clean-energy process “reversible rusting.” The battery takes in oxygen and turns iron into rust to discharge power, then reverses the process to recharge. The company just raised $750 million, pushing its total funding past $2 billion, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The batteries last longer than the Energizer Bunny. While standard lithium-ion batteries run for a few hours at a time, Form’s can keep going for 100 hours straight, long enough to get a utility through a multi-day grid emergency like a winter storm.

The money is going toward ramping up manufacturing at Form Energy’s Weirton, West Virginia plant and its first wave of commercial projects, including a 300-megawatt installation with utility Xcel Energy tied to a Google data center in Minnesota. Form’s list of projects lined up to build has quadrupled this year, from 20 to 80 gigawatt-hours, driven largely by the AI data center boom straining the power grid.

In science class, you probably learned that rust forms when iron reacts with water and air. Now a tech startup is turning that same reaction into a battery. Form Energy calls the clean-energy process “reversible rusting.” The battery takes in oxygen and turns iron into rust to discharge power, then reverses the process to recharge. The company just raised $750 million, pushing its total funding past $2 billion, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The batteries last longer than the Energizer Bunny. While standard lithium-ion batteries run for a few hours at a time, Form’s can keep going for 100 hours straight, long enough to get a utility through a multi-day grid emergency like a winter storm.

The money is going toward ramping up manufacturing at Form Energy’s Weirton, West Virginia plant and its first wave of commercial projects, including a 300-megawatt installation with utility Xcel Energy tied to a Google data center in Minnesota. Form’s list of projects lined up to build has quadrupled this year, from 20 to 80 gigawatt-hours, driven largely by the AI data center boom straining the power grid.



Source link

This Startup Raised $750 Million for Batteries Powered by Rust Read More »

I Dropped Out of Harvard to Build a $2.5 Billion AI-Powered Startup


Key Takeaways

  • Patil co-founded Function to provide a comprehensive preventive health solution.
  • She and her co-founders convinced investors of a long-term vision, in part powered by AI.
  • Now, Function is in its second act, she says — and is valued at $2.5 billion.

This as-told-to story is based on a conversation with Pranitha Patil, co-founder and chief business officer of preventive health membership platform Function, now valued at $2.5 billion. Function, co-founded by Jonathan Swerdlin (CEO), Dr. Mark Hyman (chief medical officer), Seth Weisfeld (chief design officer) and Dan Swerdlin (general counsel), provides access to more than 160 lab tests, advanced MRI and CT imaging, and AI-powered insights that help members understand what their results mean and which actions to take next. The membership costs $365 annually, compared to roughly $15,000 for comparable testing purchased independently, per the company. The piece has been edited for length and clarity. 

Image Credit: Function. Pranitha Patil.

 The journey to Function started way before 2021, when we officially launched. I experienced a few diagnoses in my teenage years and early 20s. I was diagnosed with PCOS and was pre-diabetic. My HbA1c was always teetering in the 6% range, and I had genetically high cholesterol. I was a young South Asian woman. There wasn’t enough clinical data showing what to do with somebody like me and my picture. The solution was either, “You’re going to live a pretty low-quality life,” or “You have to fix all these things yourself.” I really did feel like I was on my own, tracking my blood work and trying to figure it out. The healthcare system is set up so that you only go once you have a problem. Had I seen these signs way earlier, these markers being elevated, I would’ve done something about it. 

Dropping out of Harvard to build Function

I was at Harvard studying for a master’s in design engineering when I came up with the idea to develop a comprehensive preventive health platform. Initially, I thought a product like it must already exist somewhere in the world, but I couldn’t find it. Then I met my co-founder and CEO, Jonathan Swerdlin, and was like, “This product needs to exist.” It was a no-brainer; there wasn’t a lot of hesitation.

I connected with the rest of the co-founding team and had a lot of confidence in the people I’d be working with and the passion behind what we were building. I ended up dropping out of the Harvard program early to bring the company to life. Everything clicked. As co-founders, we have different backgrounds, but we were all driven by giving people the opportunity to own their health. That mission hasn’t changed in the five and a half years since Function’s founding.

The typical annual physical gives you a snapshot of your health at one point in time. Function offers people the most cutting-edge information, and it’s ongoing. 

Image Credit: Function

Pitching a big long-term vision to investors

We wanted to start with lab testing in blood and urine, but we always envisioned doing so much more. So the most challenging part in the early days — and this is true of building any company — was convincing investors of the bigger vision when it wasn’t here yet. For us, it was like, “Hey, we’re starting with the most comprehensive lab testing you’ve ever seen, and if you think about that data set that has never been done before, and you add things like imaging, and combine it with AI, and have other types of data sets, picture how incredible that could be.” Investors connected with our ability to communicate this big vision. Before long, we got traction for our Series A. Then the company took off from there. Now Function is valued at $2.5 billion.

Our goal is to reach eight billion people as quickly as possible. We mean that; that’s been the throughline for us since day one. AI is helping us achieve that. We use the technology in a few different ways. 

Using AI for communication and medical intelligence

We have our private AI chat, which allows members to communicate with AI after they’ve gotten their results to build a plan, learn what’s going on and get a deeper understanding of what to do next. 

Additionally, we’re building a medical intelligence lab that’s bringing together all different types of data — from labs, images, wearable devices, past medical records, etc. — to create this longitudinal picture of someone. That information is summarized in a way that the average person on the street can actually do something about it. Since that hasn’t been done before, the only way to do it is with AI. We’ve got researchers, scientists, clinicians, coders and people who really understand AI working to bring technology and medicine together and make it as clean, accessible and actionable as possible for somebody today. 

We’re in our act two as a company. For act one to be successful, we had to lay the foundation with the labs. The lab piece had to be accurate and correct, and get as many people in the door as possible multiple times a year. That behavior shift happened. Now, people are excited about seeing how their labs have changed, or their biological age has come down. But we always knew there was more to build.

Image Credit: Function

Acquisitions were critical to Function’s growth

We knew we would need to make some acquisitions to scale, which is why we added imaging, supplement intelligence through SuppCo and home blood draws with Getlabs. It would take too long to build everything in-house. And we needed to make it seamless for people to take action. If we’re telling you to take a supplement or get your blood drawn, we have to make it easy. 

We’re never going back to a time where we don’t have access to this data. Once you open Pandora’s box, it’s here. That’s a great responsibility, but it’s also such a cool time to live in because we have the opportunity to actually change health, not healthcare, but the actual health of a population.

When I think about the future, I’m reimagining everything we’ve known about how we interact with our health. This is a new set of expectations and a new set of information. Historically, this has been so severely disconnected, and you’re playing insane Tetris trying to figure out one thing about yourself. I am so excited about a world, whether that’s in three to five years or 10 years, or even sooner, where people can detect a problem before it becomes an actual problem, take action and have a strong relationship with their health. We deserve that. If we can make it that much easier for people, then we’ve done something right. 

Image Credit: Function

Building in healthcare for lasting change

I pinch myself that this is the company we built, and so much is still possible. It’s an incredible time to be building in healthcare and see the change from humans around you. So many people want to build in health. The first thing I would say is, if you’re interested in building in this space, it is most certainly bigger than yourself. The work is bigger than you, and the sooner you realize that, the better, because it humbles you in the best way. 

But on the flip side of that, healthcare is also one of the messiest industries because you’re working with old-school systems. So acknowledge that. If you’re building for the initial stages, don’t focus so much on what others are doing. If you have an idea that you believe is actually novel and should be in the world, just get started. That’s what someone told me in the early days with Function. You just have to get started. You can iterate. No one’s grading you. There’s so much to be done in this industry compared to the financial industry or any other industry. We’re always 10 years behind most of the big industries. With AI, we have the opportunity to catch up really quickly, but remain human and empathetic.

Key Takeaways

  • Patil co-founded Function to provide a comprehensive preventive health solution.
  • She and her co-founders convinced investors of a long-term vision, in part powered by AI.
  • Now, Function is in its second act, she says — and is valued at $2.5 billion.

This as-told-to story is based on a conversation with Pranitha Patil, co-founder and chief business officer of preventive health membership platform Function, now valued at $2.5 billion. Function, co-founded by Jonathan Swerdlin (CEO), Dr. Mark Hyman (chief medical officer), Seth Weisfeld (chief design officer) and Dan Swerdlin (general counsel), provides access to more than 160 lab tests, advanced MRI and CT imaging, and AI-powered insights that help members understand what their results mean and which actions to take next. The membership costs $365 annually, compared to roughly $15,000 for comparable testing purchased independently, per the company. The piece has been edited for length and clarity. 

Image Credit: Function. Pranitha Patil.

 The journey to Function started way before 2021, when we officially launched. I experienced a few diagnoses in my teenage years and early 20s. I was diagnosed with PCOS and was pre-diabetic. My HbA1c was always teetering in the 6% range, and I had genetically high cholesterol. I was a young South Asian woman. There wasn’t enough clinical data showing what to do with somebody like me and my picture. The solution was either, “You’re going to live a pretty low-quality life,” or “You have to fix all these things yourself.” I really did feel like I was on my own, tracking my blood work and trying to figure it out. The healthcare system is set up so that you only go once you have a problem. Had I seen these signs way earlier, these markers being elevated, I would’ve done something about it. 

Dropping out of Harvard to build Function

I was at Harvard studying for a master’s in design engineering when I came up with the idea to develop a comprehensive preventive health platform. Initially, I thought a product like it must already exist somewhere in the world, but I couldn’t find it. Then I met my co-founder and CEO, Jonathan Swerdlin, and was like, “This product needs to exist.” It was a no-brainer; there wasn’t a lot of hesitation.



Source link

I Dropped Out of Harvard to Build a $2.5 Billion AI-Powered Startup Read More »

What SEO Actually Costs — and When You’re Being Overcharged


Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

Key Takeaways

  • $700 vs $9,000 isn’t a scam — it’s three different products. Match the tier to your market, or you’ll pay $800 for a problem that needs $4,000 of work.
  • Budget from customer value, not package price. If the math doesn’t justify the retainer several times over, the scope (or the channel) is wrong.

Every discovery call I run reaches the same two questions. The first is “will this work?” The second is “what should SEO cost?”

Founders ask the second one nervously, because they’ve usually collected three proposals that quote three wildly different numbers for what sounds like the same service. One says $700 a month. One says $3,500. One says $9,000. Nobody explains the gap.

I price SEO deals every week at my agency, and I’ve reviewed dozens of competitor proposals that prospects forward to me. So here’s the honest breakdown I give every founder who asks — including the parts that don’t flatter my industry.

What the market actually charges

Start with real data instead of sales decks. Ahrefs surveyed 439 SEO professionals and found that 78.2% charge a monthly retainer, making it the dominant pricing model. The most common retainer bracket sits at $501 to $1,000 per month, but averages tell a different story: agencies average around $3,209 per month, while freelancers come in near $1,349.

Experience widens the gap further. The same survey found that providers with five to 10 years in business charge more than double what newcomers charge. Scope matters too — SEOs serving local markets average about $1,557 per month, while those competing nationally or globally average $3,474.

So when your three proposals say $700, $3,500 and $9,000, none of them is automatically a scam. They’re quoting three different products that happen to share a name. Your job is to figure out which product your business actually needs.

What you’re really paying for at each price level

Under $1,000 a month, you’re buying hours — a few of them. That budget covers a freelancer or offshore team handling the basics: some on-page fixes, a blog post or two and a monthly report. For a local business in a low-competition market, that can genuinely be enough.

Between $2,000 and $5,000, you’re buying a system. Real keyword strategy, content production, technical monitoring and link acquisition, usually with multiple specialists touching your account. This is where most growing businesses with real competition need to be.

Above $5,000, you’re buying competitive firepower. Enterprise sites, national terms, aggressive content programs and digital PR live here. This is the natural tier for a B2B software company chasing national commercial terms against competitors with seven-figure marketing budgets — at that level, most of the money funds content and earned media because anything smaller wouldn’t even register in the market.

The trap isn’t any specific price. The trap is paying $800 for a problem that requires $4,000 of work, then concluding SEO doesn’t work.

I see this pattern constantly in the proposals prospects forward to me. A business pays $800 a month for a year and gets two generic blog posts a month plus a ranking report full of keywords nobody actually searches. Traffic barely moves, the owner decides SEO is a scam and the honest scope for their market was closer to $3,500 all along — not because SEO is expensive, but because their competitors were already spending it.

The three signs you’re overpaying

Price alone never tells you if you’re overpaying. Deliverables do.

First, you’re overpaying if the invoice buys activity instead of strategy. A retainer that promises “four blog posts and 10 backlinks” per month is selling volume, not outcomes. Quantity guarantees are the easiest thing in SEO to fake and the least connected to revenue.

Second, you’re overpaying if nobody can explain the work in plain English. Ask what was done last month and why it should move a number you care about. If the answer is a dashboard export and jargon, the margin on your account is going somewhere other than your rankings.

Third, you’re overpaying if the price never maps to your economics. A $3,000 retainer is cheap for a business where one customer is worth $50,000 and absurd for one where a sale is worth $40. Any provider who quotes before asking about your customer value is pricing their package, not your problem.

How to actually set your SEO budget

Work backward from customer value, not forward from a package price. Figure out what a new customer is worth, estimate how many customers organic search could realistically add per month and set a budget the math can justify. If five new customers a month wouldn’t pay for the retainer several times over, either the scope is wrong or the channel is.

Then commit for at least six months, because SEO compounds and the early months are mostly groundwork. Paying $2,500 a month for three months and quitting buys you nothing. Paying $1,500 for 12 consistent months often beats it.

And whatever you spend, insist on a written definition of success before the first invoice — qualified traffic, commercial rankings, leads or revenue influenced. The number on the proposal matters far less than whether anyone agreed on what it’s supposed to buy.

Key Takeaways

  • $700 vs $9,000 isn’t a scam — it’s three different products. Match the tier to your market, or you’ll pay $800 for a problem that needs $4,000 of work.
  • Budget from customer value, not package price. If the math doesn’t justify the retainer several times over, the scope (or the channel) is wrong.

Every discovery call I run reaches the same two questions. The first is “will this work?” The second is “what should SEO cost?”

Founders ask the second one nervously, because they’ve usually collected three proposals that quote three wildly different numbers for what sounds like the same service. One says $700 a month. One says $3,500. One says $9,000. Nobody explains the gap.

I price SEO deals every week at my agency, and I’ve reviewed dozens of competitor proposals that prospects forward to me. So here’s the honest breakdown I give every founder who asks — including the parts that don’t flatter my industry.



Source link

What SEO Actually Costs — and When You’re Being Overcharged Read More »

Here’s How LinkedIn Is Fighting Back Against AI Slop


Key Takeaways

  • LinkedIn has fought low-quality content for years, including scam job postings.
  • AI has made moderating content far harder to manage.
  • AI detection firms estimate that a substantial share of LinkedIn posts and comments now involve AI, though LinkedIn disputed their results.

LinkedIn knows it has an AI problem. 

Last month, the professional networking platform started giving users a way to flag posts and comments they believe were created by AI, using a “seems like AI slop” reporting button, The Wall Street Journal recently reported. The move aims to slow the flood of AI-created content. 

LinkedIn isn’t alone. Most major social media platforms have tried to curb the rise of AI-generated posts, largely by relying on automated labels. It’s an approach with a spotty record, leaving some AI work unlabeled and mislabeling some human-created content as AI.

For example, social media star Nikolai Savic, who has five million followers on TikTok, is well-known for his creative cooking videos. He told the Journal last month that TikTok labeled some of his videos as AI-generated, even though he painstakingly edited them himself. The move caused him to lose credibility with fans. 

“People already have in their minds that I’m only using AI,” Savic said. “This hurt my reputation so much. And at TikTok, nobody really seems to care.”

The stakes may be higher for LinkedIn, which sells itself as a trusted place to find useful information, build professional relationships and uncover career opportunities for its more than one billion members

Many LinkedIn users turn to AI hoping it will help them communicate more clearly or post more often. Executives and industry observers caution that the result can be content that feels bland, overly polished or inauthentic.

AI as a new challenge

Brendan Gahan is the co-founder and CEO of Creator Authority, a LinkedIn influencer marketing agency. He told the Journal that “everybody uses AI to some degree.” However, he advises influencers to skip posting AI-generated content because it could damage their credibility. Success on the platform ultimately depends on credibility, he said. 

LinkedIn has encountered content problems before, like oversharing and scam job posts. “We have been working on this domain of low-quality content for a long time,” Oscar Rodriguez, LinkedIn’s vice president of product, told the Journal.

AI is testing the platform on a much larger scale. 

From April through June, 41% of LinkedIn’s long-form public posts and 30% of its public comments were entirely AI-generated, according to Pangram Labs, an AI-detection startup that analyzed nearly 57,000 pieces of content. The company found that LinkedIn had a higher concentration of AI-generated long posts than X, at 29%, and Reddit, at 13%.

Originality.ai, another AI-detection company, reached an even more striking conclusion. After reviewing 5,000 public LinkedIn posts in July, it determined that 81% showed more than a moderate amount of AI use. By comparison, just under half of the 5,500 public Reddit posts it reviewed met that same threshold.

LinkedIn disputed the research findings to the Journal, but did not share comparable results of its own. 

Key Takeaways

  • LinkedIn has fought low-quality content for years, including scam job postings.
  • AI has made moderating content far harder to manage.
  • AI detection firms estimate that a substantial share of LinkedIn posts and comments now involve AI, though LinkedIn disputed their results.

LinkedIn knows it has an AI problem. 

Last month, the professional networking platform started giving users a way to flag posts and comments they believe were created by AI, using a “seems like AI slop” reporting button, The Wall Street Journal recently reported. The move aims to slow the flood of AI-created content. 

LinkedIn isn’t alone. Most major social media platforms have tried to curb the rise of AI-generated posts, largely by relying on automated labels. It’s an approach with a spotty record, leaving some AI work unlabeled and mislabeling some human-created content as AI.





Source link

Here’s How LinkedIn Is Fighting Back Against AI Slop Read More »

Uber Eats Owed a Restaurant $40,000. It Took 8 Months to Pay.


Forty thousand dollars is a lot to wait on when you’re running a small restaurant. But that’s exactly what happened to Joy Kim, who spent eight months chasing down money Uber Eats owed her.

Kim, who owns Kyoto Teriyaki on Seattle’s Capitol Hill, had been waiting since November 2025 for the company to pay out nearly 1,500 orders, according to Fox 13 Seattle. She called support, sent emails, updated her bank information. Nothing worked.

It wasn’t until Fox 13 Seattle began inquiring about the missing funds that Uber Eats moved. Uber Eats said the delay came down to identity verification required to protect the merchant account, and that representatives made multiple attempts to reach Kim without success. The company said it completed video verification with her in late July and began processing the payment shortly after.

Despite the ordeal, Kim plans to keep using the platform. Local customers order through Uber Eats every day, she said, and cutting it off would mean losing a revenue stream she can’t afford to lose.

Forty thousand dollars is a lot to wait on when you’re running a small restaurant. But that’s exactly what happened to Joy Kim, who spent eight months chasing down money Uber Eats owed her.

Kim, who owns Kyoto Teriyaki on Seattle’s Capitol Hill, had been waiting since November 2025 for the company to pay out nearly 1,500 orders, according to Fox 13 Seattle. She called support, sent emails, updated her bank information. Nothing worked.

It wasn’t until Fox 13 Seattle began inquiring about the missing funds that Uber Eats moved. Uber Eats said the delay came down to identity verification required to protect the merchant account, and that representatives made multiple attempts to reach Kim without success. The company said it completed video verification with her in late July and began processing the payment shortly after.

Despite the ordeal, Kim plans to keep using the platform. Local customers order through Uber Eats every day, she said, and cutting it off would mean losing a revenue stream she can’t afford to lose.



Source link

Uber Eats Owed a Restaurant $40,000. It Took 8 Months to Pay. Read More »

Join Robert Irvine, Gary Vee, Megan Thee Stallion Business Event


It may be stalled growth, a customer segment that is not converting or a team issue that keeps resurfacing.

Every business owner has a problem they know they need to address.

To really solve the problem, business owners need dedicated time to focus, honest feedback from people who understand the stakes and a structured way to turn a broad source of frustration into a decision and a plan.

That’s why we teamed up with Robert Irvine — the celebrity chef who has helped hundreds of struggling business owners on his show “Restaurant: Impossible” — to put together Overcoming Impossible Live, a one-day Entrepreneur Level Up event taking place on October 23, 2026, at 1 Hotel Brooklyn Bridge in New York City.

This is not a traditional business conference built around back-to-back keynote presentations. It is a working session for founders and business owners like you who are ready to confront the specific issue holding their company back — and solve it.

Solve Your Biggest Business Challenge

At Overcoming Impossible Live, attendees will identify the “impossible” issue holding their business back, then work through it in structured small groups alongside founders facing similar business problems.

This is not a generic networking exercise. The goal is to put entrepreneurs in a room with peers who understand the same kind of pressure, whether that is a growth problem, leadership challenge, operational issue or difficult strategic choice.

Robert Irvine and Entrepreneur Editor in Chief Jason Feifer will coach attendees through the workshop experience. The goal is to help you leave with:

  • Clarity on the problem you need to solve
  • Feedback from founders facing comparable business challenges
  • A concrete action plan for when you return to work

Hear Real Business Lessons

The afternoon will bring together three entrepreneurs who have built, rebuilt and made difficult decisions at scale.

Robert Irvine will be joined by Gary Vaynerchuk and Megan Thee Stallion, who will each share an honest story about a moment when they were stuck—what happened, what it cost and the steps they took to help them move forward.

Gary Vaynerchuk will deliver his “State of the Union on Attention,” while Megan Thee Stallion will share lessons on overcoming the odds and owning difficult decisions.

Ask the Questions That Matter

Overcoming Impossible Live also creates space for entrepreneurs to ask direct questions about their own businesses.

That distinction matters. The value this exclusive event provides is to use the room to pressure-test your own situation, hear candid perspectives and leave better equipped to act.

If there is a problem you have been working around instead of working on, this is the day to put it all on the table.

Register for Overcoming Impossible Live

It may be stalled growth, a customer segment that is not converting or a team issue that keeps resurfacing.

Every business owner has a problem they know they need to address.

To really solve the problem, business owners need dedicated time to focus, honest feedback from people who understand the stakes and a structured way to turn a broad source of frustration into a decision and a plan.



Source link

Join Robert Irvine, Gary Vee, Megan Thee Stallion Business Event Read More »

Stop Solving the Wrong Problem — First Ask This Question When Growth Stalls


Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

Key Takeaways

  • Early validation is not permanent validation — a product that solved a clear need six months ago can quietly drift from the problem it was built to address.
  • What customers say and what they do are rarely the same — trust the behavior over the feedback, because purchasing patterns and drop-offs are more honest signals than anything in a survey.

Founders are often taught to move quickly, listen to feedback and keep improving. That advice is useful, but it can also create a trap. When a product or business model starts to struggle, many entrepreneurs immediately look for ways to refine the solution. They add a feature. They adjust the messaging. They change the packaging, pricing or sales process.

Sometimes that works. Other times it only makes the business more complicated. I have learned that one of the most important questions a founder can ask is not “How do we make this better?” It is “Are we still solving the right problem?”

That question matters because markets do not stand still. Economic pressure changes buying behavior. What felt urgent to customers at one stage of the business may feel less relevant six months later. A product that once solved a clear need can slowly drift away from the problem it was created to address.

This is especially important for founders building in health, wellness, consumer products or any category where trust, behavior and daily routines matter. Customers may not always be able to explain what they need in a survey or review. But they will show it through what they buy, repeat, abandon and recommend.

Research from McKinsey has found that organizations that leverage customer behavioral insights outperform their peers by 85% in sales growth and more than 25% in gross margin. For founders, the takeaway is simple: strategy should not be built only around what customers say. It should also be built around what they do.

Reassess the problem before refining the solution

Founders can become attached to their original idea because they remember the energy that gave rise to it. They remember the pain point, the early conversations and the first signs of traction. But early validation is not permanent validation.

The more a company grows, the more dangerous assumptions become. A founder may think the problem is still convenience, when the customer now cares more about trust. They may think the challenge is price, when the real barrier is confusion. They may think the market wants more options, when customers are actually asking for a clearer path.

Before refining a product, founders should pause and define the current problem as clearly as possible. What is the customer trying to solve today? What has changed in the market? What pressure is the customer feeling now that they were not feeling before?

In my own work across consumer and wellness brands, this reassessment has been essential. A product may begin with one promise, but the customer’s relationship with that product can reveal something deeper. They may not only want a supplement, a skincare product or a wellness solution. They may want simplicity, confidence, consistency or a better way to make daily choices that support their lives.

When my team understands that deeper problem, improvement becomes more focused. The goal is no longer to add more. It is to solve more precisely.

Let behavior lead your strategy

Customer feedback matters, but it is not the whole story. Customers can tell you what they think they want. Their behavior tells you what they truly value.

That is why founders should pay close attention to purchasing patterns, repeat usage, drop-off points, engagement signals and the moments when customers hesitate. These signals reveal where your business is aligned and where it is creating friction.

If customers consistently purchase one product but ignore a bundle, the issue may not be awareness — the bundle may be too confusing. If customers engage heavily with educational content but hesitate to buy, the product may need clearer proof or simpler positioning. If customers buy once but do not return, the problem may be experience, expectation or follow-through.

I have learned to separate preference from behavior. A customer may say they want more choices, but too many choices can create decision fatigue. A customer may say they want innovation, but what they actually reward is reliability. A customer may praise a brand’s mission, but only buy when the offer feels clear and useful.

Real-world action is one of the most honest forms of feedback. The founder’s job is to notice it without defensiveness.

Simplify before you scale

When growth slows, many companies respond by adding. They add more products, more features, more campaigns and more explanations. The intention is usually good. The result is often confusion.

Complexity can make a business feel more sophisticated internally while making it harder for customers to understand externally. In their influential Harvard Business Review study on “feature fatigue,” Roland Rust and colleagues found that consumers routinely pick feature-rich products at the moment of purchase, then abandon them once they discover the complexity gets in the way of actually using them. The lesson for founders is unambiguous: more is not the same as better.

Founders should ask hard questions before scaling. Is the offer clear enough to grow? Can people quickly understand what the product does? Can they see who it is for? Can they explain the value in their own words? Can they buy, use and recommend it without needing excessive explanation? Answering those questions requires looking at the entire customer journey.

Simplicity does not mean reducing ambition. It means removing anything that distracts from the core value. In many cases, scaling becomes easier when the offer is narrower, the message is cleaner and the experience is more intuitive.

Build reassessment into the business

Product-market fit is not a finish line. It is a relationship between the company, the customer and the market — and like any relationship, it requires continued attention.

Founders should create systems that make reassessment part of the business rhythm. That may include regular reviews of customer behavior, cross-functional conversations between product and marketing teams, post-purchase analysis, customer service insights and market trend reviews.

The key is not to collect more data for its own sake. The key is to turn feedback into decisions. What should be simplified? What should be removed? What should be tested? What needs to be explained differently? What assumption is no longer true?

This process also requires humility. Founders must be willing to admit that a product can be good and still need to change. A strategy can be smart and still need to evolve. A market can validate an idea once and still demand something different later.

The founders who build lasting companies are not only the ones who move fast. They are the ones who stay close enough to the customer to know when to pause, reassess and redirect.

Growth is not always about building the next version of the solution. Sometimes it is about returning to the problem with fresh eyes. When founders make that a habit, they give their companies a better chance to stay relevant, useful and resilient as the market changes.

Key Takeaways

  • Early validation is not permanent validation — a product that solved a clear need six months ago can quietly drift from the problem it was built to address.
  • What customers say and what they do are rarely the same — trust the behavior over the feedback, because purchasing patterns and drop-offs are more honest signals than anything in a survey.

Founders are often taught to move quickly, listen to feedback and keep improving. That advice is useful, but it can also create a trap. When a product or business model starts to struggle, many entrepreneurs immediately look for ways to refine the solution. They add a feature. They adjust the messaging. They change the packaging, pricing or sales process.

Sometimes that works. Other times it only makes the business more complicated. I have learned that one of the most important questions a founder can ask is not “How do we make this better?” It is “Are we still solving the right problem?”

That question matters because markets do not stand still. Economic pressure changes buying behavior. What felt urgent to customers at one stage of the business may feel less relevant six months later. A product that once solved a clear need can slowly drift away from the problem it was created to address.



Source link

Stop Solving the Wrong Problem — First Ask This Question When Growth Stalls Read More »

4 Lessons I Learned Building a Sustainable Business From the Ground Up


Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

Key Takeaways

  • Spend time in the field, where the problems are real. Firsthand exposure reveals challenges and opportunities that rarely show up from a distance.
  • Be ready to change direction. Sometimes the right move is to step back and ask whether your current path still aligns with your long-term goals.
  • Think global, act local. Most founders focus on local competition, but the real edge comes from spotting global trends before they hit your own market.
  • Build credibility before visibility. Advertising can buy attention but not trust. Build relationships, understand the industry, educate stakeholders and create genuine value.

Most people assume successful businesses start with a detailed plan or a big idea. In my case, both companies I founded began with little more than a willingness to act.

Years spent helping companies grow through strategy, content and customer acquisition taught me a lot, but eventually I hit a ceiling. My first business had run its course. The real value was in what it revealed: bigger opportunities waiting beyond my current work. So I sold my company and started over.

The path forward was anything but linear. Mistakes, hard lessons, international travel and personal investment shaped every phase. Each decision, good or bad, pushed me closer to launching a biodegradable startup.

During the Covid years, I spent nearly four years in Uttarakhand working closely with farmers and rural communities across different regions. Working alongside farmers gave me a ground-level view of challenges and surfaced opportunities that rarely show up in market reports.

Transitioning from idea to reality, I realized building a sustainable business is a different game from launching a conventional startup. Timelines stretch, challenges multiply, and results take longer to materialize. But when progress comes, it tends to last. Each phase surfaced lessons that still shape how I approach decisions today.

1. Spend time in the field

One of my biggest lessons came from working in the hemp industry. It looked easy to source hemp because it was widely available. But in practice, scaling up was much more complicated.

There were regulatory hurdles, unclear land titles and tough terrain that made operations difficult. I wouldn’t have known about these problems from reports or research alone. I learned about them by living and working in those areas.

This experience showed me that opportunities are rarely limited by demand. Instead, they are often held back by challenges you only see when you’re actually there. If you want to build something that lasts, spend time where the problems are real. Firsthand exposure reveals challenges and opportunities that rarely show up from a distance.

2. Be ready to change direction

One of the hardest decisions I made was selling my first business. Entrepreneurs hear a lot about persistence, but self-awareness matters just as much. Sometimes the right move is to step back and ask whether your current path still aligns with your long-term goals.

For me, the business served its purpose. It gave me experience, industry knowledge, relationships and a better understanding of sustainability.

3. Think global, act local

As I continued exploring opportunities in sustainability, I traveled to China and Australia to better understand how other markets were approaching innovation, manufacturing and the environment. Travel forced me to rethink how I approached challenges and opportunities. That shift in perspective is often what drives sustainable growth.

In China, I saw how industries can scale rapidly when infrastructure, manufacturing capabilities and market demand align. In Australia, I saw a strong emphasis on sustainability and long-term environmental thinking.

Opportunities often appear in one market years before they show up in others. Most founders focus on local competition, but the real edge comes from spotting global trends before they hit your own market.

Travel doesn’t always give you answers, but it does give you perspective. And having perspective helps you make better decisions.

4. Build credibility before visibility

People often ask me how I managed to grow my business without spending money on ads. The answer is simple: I focused on building credibility before trying to get noticed.

It’s tempting to think growth only comes from bigger marketing budgets. Advertising can buy attention but not trust. Focus on building relationships, understanding the industry, educating stakeholders and creating genuine value.

While founding Ukhi, the materials science deep tech startup I started, I focused on building genuine content authority through original research studies and high-quality blog posts, all intended to help our customers. Now, this strategy is paying off.

This approach took patience. Building credibility is slow, but the payoff lasts longer than any quick win from advertising.

Business growth came slower, but it stuck. People engaged because they trusted us. We did not run ad campaigns at all. And increased trust led to referrals, partnerships and opportunities that money rarely buys.

Credibility compounds

One of the most valuable lessons I learned is that credibility compounds. Advertising stops when the budget runs out, but trust keeps working long after. Look at successful businesses; they often focus on outcomes. They see growth, funding, partnerships or market traction.

What rarely gets noticed are the years spent learning, making mistakes and investing before results show up.

Those early stages are what make sustainable success possible. For me, it evolved through years of working with farmers, expanded through international exposure and continues today through new ventures and ongoing investment in sustainability.

If there’s one lesson for aspiring entrepreneurs, it’s that clarity almost never comes before action. Most of the opportunities that shaped my career only showed up after I took the first step.

The path was rarely clear or easy, but every lesson and mistake helped me better understand my impact. That, more than any business plan, is what helped me build a sustainable business from nothing.

Key Takeaways

  • Spend time in the field, where the problems are real. Firsthand exposure reveals challenges and opportunities that rarely show up from a distance.
  • Be ready to change direction. Sometimes the right move is to step back and ask whether your current path still aligns with your long-term goals.
  • Think global, act local. Most founders focus on local competition, but the real edge comes from spotting global trends before they hit your own market.
  • Build credibility before visibility. Advertising can buy attention but not trust. Build relationships, understand the industry, educate stakeholders and create genuine value.

Most people assume successful businesses start with a detailed plan or a big idea. In my case, both companies I founded began with little more than a willingness to act.

Years spent helping companies grow through strategy, content and customer acquisition taught me a lot, but eventually I hit a ceiling. My first business had run its course. The real value was in what it revealed: bigger opportunities waiting beyond my current work. So I sold my company and started over.

The path forward was anything but linear. Mistakes, hard lessons, international travel and personal investment shaped every phase. Each decision, good or bad, pushed me closer to launching a biodegradable startup.



Source link

4 Lessons I Learned Building a Sustainable Business From the Ground Up Read More »

Mark Zuckerberg Just Published a 6,500-Word Essay on AI


Mark Zuckerberg published a 6,500-word essay this week laying out his vision for artificial intelligence. The timing isn’t random. Meta is lagging behind in the AI race and trying to catch up to rivals like Anthropic and OpenAI, according to the Wall Street Journal. It also comes as investors grow impatient with Meta’s AI spending, after the company’s free cash flow recently collapsed.

Here’s the gist of his argument. Zuckerberg wants AI to stay open, meaning anyone can download and build on Meta’s models, rather than locked inside a few giant companies. He’s argued before that concentrating AI power is dangerous and believes open access creates more jobs. He also wants the government working more closely with AI labs before models launch, rather than a fixed review period. And he’s giving Meta’s own board more say over what counts as safe.

Perhaps to fend off local opposition to data centers, Zuck also offered a new $1 billion fund for communities near Meta’s data centers.

Mark Zuckerberg published a 6,500-word essay this week laying out his vision for artificial intelligence. The timing isn’t random. Meta is lagging behind in the AI race and trying to catch up to rivals like Anthropic and OpenAI, according to the Wall Street Journal. It also comes as investors grow impatient with Meta’s AI spending, after the company’s free cash flow recently collapsed.

Here’s the gist of his argument. Zuckerberg wants AI to stay open, meaning anyone can download and build on Meta’s models, rather than locked inside a few giant companies. He’s argued before that concentrating AI power is dangerous and believes open access creates more jobs. He also wants the government working more closely with AI labs before models launch, rather than a fixed review period. And he’s giving Meta’s own board more say over what counts as safe.

Perhaps to fend off local opposition to data centers, Zuck also offered a new $1 billion fund for communities near Meta’s data centers.



Source link

Mark Zuckerberg Just Published a 6,500-Word Essay on AI Read More »

Run This Simple Stress Test on Your Business (Before the Market Does It for You)


Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

Key Takeaways

  • Most startups have a hidden single point of failure — a partner, a channel, a person, an infrastructure provider — and mapping those dependencies before a downturn hits is what separates founders who can pivot from the ones who can’t.
  • Even founders with authority to act often can’t move fast enough when the pressure comes, because control, cap-table structure and internal decision speed are usually only tested in the moment they matter most.

Most companies don’t break all at once. They crack in predictable places, but founders often don’t look there until something forces them to.

I went through this cycle at UNest, the fintech company I founded to help families invest for their children’s future. On paper, we were growing, raising capital and building a product customers wanted. But underneath, there were risks we hadn’t fully pressure-tested. When the environment changed, those risks surfaced quickly.

If you want to understand how resilient your business actually is, you don’t need a complex framework. You need to test four things: your cash, your dependencies, your level of control and your ability to make decisions under pressure.

1. Start with cash: Model the version of reality you don’t want

Most founders track runway based on current burn and expected growth. That’s useful, but it doesn’t tell you how the business behaves under stress. The faster way to see the truth is to model scenarios that break your assumptions.

Take your current numbers and run three variations. First, assume revenue drops by 30%. Second, assume your costs increase by 20%, which happens more often than people expect when something shifts in the market. Third, assume you cannot raise capital for six to 12 months. Then look at what happens.

How many months of runway do you actually have in each case? How much of your cost base is fixed versus variable? If you needed to reduce burn by 30% to 50%, how long would that take, and what would be the impact? I’ve seen founders realize that what looked like 12 months of runway turns into five very quickly.

External shocks are a real possibility you must insulate yourself from. A platform like Meta can change priorities overnight. A new AI feature can replace part of your product. Shipping costs can spike unexpectedly, as many companies experienced during COVID. If your model only works when everything goes right, you’re doing it wrong.

2. Map dependencies like they’re risk, not strategy

Most startups have a hidden single point of failure. It might be a partner, a distribution channel or even one person on the team.

At UNest, we leaned heavily on third-party infrastructure early on. It helped us move faster and conserve cash, which looked like a smart trade-off. What I didn’t fully appreciate was how much control we were giving up. We started seeing it in small ways — onboarding flows in our app depended on external processes, and what should have taken minutes required manual work, workarounds and sometimes even physical paperwork. That friction compounds, and over time, it becomes an operational risk.

To make this visible, you need to map dependencies explicitly. List out your top dependencies across three areas: how you acquire customers, how your product actually works behind the scenes and where your capital comes from. Then test each one.

You’ll start to see patterns. Some dependencies are painful but manageable, while others are existential. The ones that fall into the second category are the ones you need to fix or diversify. When infrastructure providers shut down, they can take down entire ecosystems.

3. Can you even make the decision you want?

Most founders assume they are in control of their company. That assumption usually holds until the first real downturn. The question to ask is straightforward: If things start breaking, do you actually have the full authority and support to change direction?

Start with your cap table and board structure. If one investor has blocking rights over financing, strategy or exits, that will shape what options are realistically available to you. The same is true if multiple board members are tied to the same fund or aligned incentives. On paper, it may look balanced. In practice, it can concentrate control.

You also need to understand where approvals are required. Can you reduce burn, pivot the product or change strategy without board approval? Or do those decisions require alignment across multiple stakeholders?

This becomes critical in a downturn. I’ve seen situations where founders wanted to pivot and keep building, while investors pushed to shut the company down and have capital returned. That outcome was determined by how control was structured from the beginning. You don’t want to discover these constraints when you’re already under pressure — by then, your options are limited to what the structure allows.

4. Even if you can decide, can your team execute quickly?

Having the authority to make decisions is only part of the equation. The next question is whether your company can act on those decisions fast enough.

In most startups, execution slows down under pressure — not because people aren’t capable, but because the system isn’t designed for speed. The breakdown usually happens in predictable ways: teams spend too much time analyzing instead of acting, decisions get reopened instead of executed and ownership is unclear so work stalls even after alignment.

You can test this directly without waiting for a real crisis. Take a realistic scenario and run it as a working session. For example, assume your primary acquisition channel doubles in cost overnight, or a key partner shuts down. Then walk through what actually happens.

Pay attention to how the team responds. If it takes too long to reach decisions, or if no one clearly owns the next steps, that’s where your system will fail under real pressure. In a downturn, speed is not just helpful — it determines whether you have the time and ability to recover.

Don’t ignore the founder side of the stress test

There is one more variable in all of this, and it’s the founder. In every difficult moment I’ve gone through, the hardest part was not identifying the problem. It was making decisions quickly without complete information and standing behind them. You should pressure-test that as well.

Are you ready to make decisions that will be unpopular internally or with your investors? Can you keep operating when you don’t have clear answers? Do you have the resilience to lead through uncertainty?

At some point, every founder hits a roadblock. The question is whether you’ve already examined your own reactions and performed this stress test before it happens. Because in a downturn, your judgment, your speed and your willingness to act become the system the company runs on.

Key Takeaways

  • Most startups have a hidden single point of failure — a partner, a channel, a person, an infrastructure provider — and mapping those dependencies before a downturn hits is what separates founders who can pivot from the ones who can’t.
  • Even founders with authority to act often can’t move fast enough when the pressure comes, because control, cap-table structure and internal decision speed are usually only tested in the moment they matter most.

Most companies don’t break all at once. They crack in predictable places, but founders often don’t look there until something forces them to.

I went through this cycle at UNest, the fintech company I founded to help families invest for their children’s future. On paper, we were growing, raising capital and building a product customers wanted. But underneath, there were risks we hadn’t fully pressure-tested. When the environment changed, those risks surfaced quickly.

If you want to understand how resilient your business actually is, you don’t need a complex framework. You need to test four things: your cash, your dependencies, your level of control and your ability to make decisions under pressure.



Source link

Run This Simple Stress Test on Your Business (Before the Market Does It for You) Read More »