i'm a big believer in the importance of investing. @maybebullish and I started @roundhill largely because we saw an opportunity to make investing interesting to an under served audience of investors.

we've made mistakes along the way, and while many our specific to our biz,

/1

it feels like the apply more broadly to disruption.

1) just because the firms you're trying to disrupt do something doesn't mean you have to. quite frankly, it most likely means you shouldn't. they've been doing it for a while now and got to where they are because they're

/2

good at it. are you really going to beat them at their game?

2) that said, you have to understand "the old way". if your theory is that the existing approach isn't reaching a specific audience, you need to create a new approach. to do that, you need to understand the old one

/3

3) once you understand the old way, be ready to stick to your convictions. well-meaning, intelligent people in your industry won't understand how you can "not do X"... they're making the wrong conclusion. instead, you need to think about it as "we can't win if we just do X".

/4

4) building on the last point - don't take half-measures to "kind-of" do it the old way. you already know these channels are crowded, and that you aren't likely to win in them with a 110% investment in them... how are you going to win with 50%? the earlier the you realize

/5

this, the better of you are.

5) finally, trust your audience. you're building a business around a theory that they want something different. you have to trust they'll know it when they see it. in financial services, we can't always say exactly what we'd like to say...

/6

i'm often concerned that this'll lead to people misunderstanding what we are doing. more often than not, i'm proven wrong.

/end