How do you gauge, whether a project idea is viable to be implemented? Mainly financially?

[soundmodel]

How do you gauge, whether a project idea is viable to be implemented? Mainly financially?

That is, whether the time that a project requires to be complete is worth spending?

Since all time spent on a project can be thought to be a choice between that project vs some other.

Then again, I find that it's difficult to predict, whether some project will become financially popular or not.

[JCJR]

I agree it is difficult to evaluate. All business is tough but if you are in it for the money then there is probably more money in something entirely unrelated to music, if you can get your head oriented toward some other specialty. I personally never could get interested in hotel reservation software or banking apps or whatever. Maybe were I younger could get sufficiently interested in CAD/CAM/CNC, though even that field might be "a little too much fun" for good profit potential.

The most reliable profit potential are specialties so hopelessly difficult and dull that you have to lock up the guns during work hours to make sure you can make it thru the day without taking the easy way out. There isn't much competition for those gigs and the work is needed. For any gig remotely interesting, competition will be high and profit potential therefore minimal.

If you just can't help yourself and got to do music software, then IMO for most folks the best you can do is nail as good as you can, exactly what you think is cool, regardless what anyone else thinks of the idea. If it turns out a popular idea then if you market it right then you can make some money. If it turns out you were the only one who liked the idea, then maybe better luck with the next idea.

Given a priority choice between several possible ideas, which to try first-- Back in the 1980's was working on some rough ideas about MIDI delay compensation and also some rough ideas about using computer as "alternate controller mapper" to make it easier to play music. I was talking about it with Craig Anderton and his opinion was that there was probably more money in software to enable easier musical expression than in "techie" millisecond-adjusting software. For one thing, more potential customers (at least at that time) could understand the purpose of the "easier music making" software. His advice seemed to make sense at the time, but nowadays maybe some abstract techie thing would be a bigger seller, dunno.

I just doubt that it would be useful to "second-guess" the market and throw a lot of effort into software you think lots of people might buy, but you yourself don't have much interest in. That approach would be like designing a car with even bigger tailfins in 1959, or writing songs that sound more like the Beatles than the Beatles in 1972. The trailing edge of a trend.

Musicians have the same problem. Maybe a musician will play music only he likes and nobody else likes. On the other hand a musician who does music he personally does not like, intentionally designed to be dumbed-down popular with the masses-- It takes quite a talented actor to sell something he doesn't himself believe in. The fabulously popular stars of dumbed-down pop music actually LIKE dumbed-down pop music so it is easy to sell. So all you can do is do the best you can on what you like, and maybe other people will like it and maybe not, but it is still better odds of success than making a 1959 car with bigger tailfins than any other 1959 car.

[PurpleSunray]

That is, whether the time that a project requires to be complete is worth spending?
Since all time spent on a project can be thought to be a choice between that project vs some other.
Then again, I find that it's difficult to predict, whether some project will become financially popular or not.

There are various models. The 'scientific' approach would something like:

- Find out about Total Available Market (TAM). That's the total market demand - how many audio plugins are sold?
- Find out about Serviceable Available Market (SAM). That is the part of the TAM you are able to address (not everyone that has demand can use you product - geographical reach, language, plugin formats, operating systems, ect. pp).

You can get this number from market research companies, such as Gartner & co.

- Find out about Serviceable Obtainable Market (SOM). That is the part of the SAM you are planning to actually sell to. It's the most important number. Collect info about your competitors and define a goal... like "SAM is evenly split between 4 vendors, I want to get 5% from each on first year so I'm at 20% SOM" (very optimistic ).

Now put in real numbers instead of percent and you end up with a sales & revenue estimation.

As a last step, compare the revenue estimation with your cost estimation.
What comes out is the most popular value across all boards of directors, when it comes to selecting what do to and what not: the ROI (Return On Invest)
ROI = revenue_estimation / cost_estimation
If it is below 1, you lose money, don't do. Below 1.5 is ergotherapy, above 1.5 you start to make money.

But as said, there are many ways to do it. The "start up / little project"' approach would be:
just do it / don't do it, based on gut-feeling. Buying market research numbers costs money as well - make sure you don't spend 10k$ on market research, on a project where you expect 1k revenue.

[Richard_Synapse]

Just do something you believe in, something you want to have yourself or something people ask for (ideally experienced people who already know many plugins). If your idea competes with existing software, be sure to factor in a slow start, and a lot of work/time to convince users that it is worth actually bothering with your software.

Richard