Investors want high returns with minimal risk, so they avoid "nice-to-have" solutions. Here’s why.

🔌 Market demand is everything. This is why must-have solutions solve deep needs, attract more customers and convert those customers into die-hard fans. These solutions are so meaningful and impactful that they can move the needle and, in turn, see rapid growth. From the investors’ perspective, scale is king. This is why nice-to-haves don’t have a place. Sure, a well-made on-demand app that uses social media to connect to the local market might be nice. In fact, it may be wonderful – it might even be fun. But is it critical? Can you survive without it?

🏹 Competitive edge is important. Nice-to-haves offer nothing genuinely differentiated, and so are easy for the competition to copy. They are usually found in saturated marketplaces. Instead, must-have products offer a wholly new type of solution – something that is difficult to clone. They are products that create or change a marketplace, and this makes them attractive to VCs.

🧭 Revenue is a thing. Products solving big problems can charge higher prices and sell more consistently. Nice-to-haves suffer from both price and sales and tend to be dependent on the latest trends, which is precisely why they are fickle. Must-haves promise higher prices and more consistent revenue. Investors clearly want products that remain current and stay in demand over time.

🛰 Risk management is key. Nice-to-haves carry higher risk because demand couldn’t be predicted accurately and it’s difficult to estimate revenue in the market. Investors want to minimize risk by backing products with clear needs and market paths. The must-haves have strong market validation and steady growth, which enable for easier funding next time and easier exit strategies. Nice-to-haves struggle to obtain more funds and potentially complicate exit strategies.