OXN Labs
@oxnlabs.bsky.social
Most academic entrepreneurship support assumes you ONLY want VC. Not here. Build YOUR model: courses, consulting, social ventures, or startups. Guiding academic entrepreneurs & entrepreneurial academics from research to revenue, impact, or influence.
Customer discovery isn't about ego validation.
It's not about collecting evidence that you're right.
It's about finding what's actually true, even if that means your first hypothesis was wrong.
Go into each conversation genuinely curious.
❌ Not defensive.
❌ Not trying to convince.
✅ Curious.
It's not about collecting evidence that you're right.
It's about finding what's actually true, even if that means your first hypothesis was wrong.
Go into each conversation genuinely curious.
❌ Not defensive.
❌ Not trying to convince.
✅ Curious.
January 10, 2026 at 9:35 PM
Customer discovery isn't about ego validation.
It's not about collecting evidence that you're right.
It's about finding what's actually true, even if that means your first hypothesis was wrong.
Go into each conversation genuinely curious.
❌ Not defensive.
❌ Not trying to convince.
✅ Curious.
It's not about collecting evidence that you're right.
It's about finding what's actually true, even if that means your first hypothesis was wrong.
Go into each conversation genuinely curious.
❌ Not defensive.
❌ Not trying to convince.
✅ Curious.
✅ Good customer discovery answer:
"We spend 10 hours a week on this. We've tried other tools, but they don't work for us. If I could find something that works, I'd have budget for it next quarter."
❌ Bad answer:
"It's annoying, but we've been doing it this way for years."
💡Hear the difference?
"We spend 10 hours a week on this. We've tried other tools, but they don't work for us. If I could find something that works, I'd have budget for it next quarter."
❌ Bad answer:
"It's annoying, but we've been doing it this way for years."
💡Hear the difference?
January 9, 2026 at 6:34 PM
✅ Good customer discovery answer:
"We spend 10 hours a week on this. We've tried other tools, but they don't work for us. If I could find something that works, I'd have budget for it next quarter."
❌ Bad answer:
"It's annoying, but we've been doing it this way for years."
💡Hear the difference?
"We spend 10 hours a week on this. We've tried other tools, but they don't work for us. If I could find something that works, I'd have budget for it next quarter."
❌ Bad answer:
"It's annoying, but we've been doing it this way for years."
💡Hear the difference?
At the end of every customer conversation, ask:
"Who else should I talk to about this?"
If the problem is real and urgent, they'll know other people who have it.
If they hesitate or can't think of anyone? Yellow flag.
The problem might not be as widespread as you think.
"Who else should I talk to about this?"
If the problem is real and urgent, they'll know other people who have it.
If they hesitate or can't think of anyone? Yellow flag.
The problem might not be as widespread as you think.
January 9, 2026 at 3:37 AM
At the end of every customer conversation, ask:
"Who else should I talk to about this?"
If the problem is real and urgent, they'll know other people who have it.
If they hesitate or can't think of anyone? Yellow flag.
The problem might not be as widespread as you think.
"Who else should I talk to about this?"
If the problem is real and urgent, they'll know other people who have it.
If they hesitate or can't think of anyone? Yellow flag.
The problem might not be as widespread as you think.
Finding out you're wrong in conversation #3 is a massive win.
Because the alternative is spending 6 months building a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.
Early "no" responses aren't failure.
They're cheap data.
Because the alternative is spending 6 months building a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.
Early "no" responses aren't failure.
They're cheap data.
January 8, 2026 at 4:10 AM
Finding out you're wrong in conversation #3 is a massive win.
Because the alternative is spending 6 months building a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.
Early "no" responses aren't failure.
They're cheap data.
Because the alternative is spending 6 months building a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.
Early "no" responses aren't failure.
They're cheap data.
The question that kills discovery convos:
"Do you struggle with [exact problem my research solves]?"
It's a leading question. You'll get the answer you want.
Better question:
"How do you currently handle [relevant process]? What's frustrating about it?"
Let them describe in their own words.
"Do you struggle with [exact problem my research solves]?"
It's a leading question. You'll get the answer you want.
Better question:
"How do you currently handle [relevant process]? What's frustrating about it?"
Let them describe in their own words.
January 6, 2026 at 8:19 PM
The question that kills discovery convos:
"Do you struggle with [exact problem my research solves]?"
It's a leading question. You'll get the answer you want.
Better question:
"How do you currently handle [relevant process]? What's frustrating about it?"
Let them describe in their own words.
"Do you struggle with [exact problem my research solves]?"
It's a leading question. You'll get the answer you want.
Better question:
"How do you currently handle [relevant process]? What's frustrating about it?"
Let them describe in their own words.
Stop thinking of customer discovery as "sales."
Start thinking of it as qualitative research where you study a market problem instead of an academic phenomenon.
You can do this. Just get reps in.
👉 Learn how to frame early calls in this week's newsletter:
thespinout.substack.com/p/the-first-...
Start thinking of it as qualitative research where you study a market problem instead of an academic phenomenon.
You can do this. Just get reps in.
👉 Learn how to frame early calls in this week's newsletter:
thespinout.substack.com/p/the-first-...
The First Conversation (Without Selling)
Stop trying to pitch. Start trying to learn.
thespinout.substack.com
January 6, 2026 at 4:12 AM
Stop thinking of customer discovery as "sales."
Start thinking of it as qualitative research where you study a market problem instead of an academic phenomenon.
You can do this. Just get reps in.
👉 Learn how to frame early calls in this week's newsletter:
thespinout.substack.com/p/the-first-...
Start thinking of it as qualitative research where you study a market problem instead of an academic phenomenon.
You can do this. Just get reps in.
👉 Learn how to frame early calls in this week's newsletter:
thespinout.substack.com/p/the-first-...
Your goal in the first 20 customer conversations isn't to close deals.
It's to figure out if you've identified a segment that:
✅ Is reachable
✅ Has budget
✅ Feels the problem urgently enough to act
If 15/20 conversations confirm this? You're onto something.
If 5/20 do? Adjust and try again.
It's to figure out if you've identified a segment that:
✅ Is reachable
✅ Has budget
✅ Feels the problem urgently enough to act
If 15/20 conversations confirm this? You're onto something.
If 5/20 do? Adjust and try again.
January 5, 2026 at 1:42 AM
Your goal in the first 20 customer conversations isn't to close deals.
It's to figure out if you've identified a segment that:
✅ Is reachable
✅ Has budget
✅ Feels the problem urgently enough to act
If 15/20 conversations confirm this? You're onto something.
If 5/20 do? Adjust and try again.
It's to figure out if you've identified a segment that:
✅ Is reachable
✅ Has budget
✅ Feels the problem urgently enough to act
If 15/20 conversations confirm this? You're onto something.
If 5/20 do? Adjust and try again.
"Lots of people could use this" keeps you stuck in perpetual market research mode.
"Here are 10 specific people I'm going to talk to this week" gets you data.
Vague feels safer.
Specific moves faster.
"Here are 10 specific people I'm going to talk to this week" gets you data.
Vague feels safer.
Specific moves faster.
January 4, 2026 at 12:52 AM
"Lots of people could use this" keeps you stuck in perpetual market research mode.
"Here are 10 specific people I'm going to talk to this week" gets you data.
Vague feels safer.
Specific moves faster.
"Here are 10 specific people I'm going to talk to this week" gets you data.
Vague feels safer.
Specific moves faster.
Here's the mistake:
👉 You have 3 good conversations. People validate the problem.
They say "I'd be interested in hearing more."
❌ So you spend 6 months building.
Then you come back and they've moved on.
💡Don't build yet. Have 20 conversations first.
👉 You have 3 good conversations. People validate the problem.
They say "I'd be interested in hearing more."
❌ So you spend 6 months building.
Then you come back and they've moved on.
💡Don't build yet. Have 20 conversations first.
January 2, 2026 at 6:49 PM
Here's the mistake:
👉 You have 3 good conversations. People validate the problem.
They say "I'd be interested in hearing more."
❌ So you spend 6 months building.
Then you come back and they've moved on.
💡Don't build yet. Have 20 conversations first.
👉 You have 3 good conversations. People validate the problem.
They say "I'd be interested in hearing more."
❌ So you spend 6 months building.
Then you come back and they've moved on.
💡Don't build yet. Have 20 conversations first.
Here are three questions that will help you begin to narrow your customer focus:
1️⃣Who has this problem badly enough that they're already trying to solve it?
2️⃣Who has budget authority to purchase a solution?
3️⃣Who can you actually reach in the next 30 days?
Create that list and start outreach there.
1️⃣Who has this problem badly enough that they're already trying to solve it?
2️⃣Who has budget authority to purchase a solution?
3️⃣Who can you actually reach in the next 30 days?
Create that list and start outreach there.
January 2, 2026 at 5:24 AM
Here are three questions that will help you begin to narrow your customer focus:
1️⃣Who has this problem badly enough that they're already trying to solve it?
2️⃣Who has budget authority to purchase a solution?
3️⃣Who can you actually reach in the next 30 days?
Create that list and start outreach there.
1️⃣Who has this problem badly enough that they're already trying to solve it?
2️⃣Who has budget authority to purchase a solution?
3️⃣Who can you actually reach in the next 30 days?
Create that list and start outreach there.
Most academic entrepreneurs answer "who's your customer?" by listing possibilities:
"Healthcare systems, manufacturers, government agencies..."
That's not a customer segment.
That's a brainstorming session.
And brainstorming doesn't get you meetings.
"Healthcare systems, manufacturers, government agencies..."
That's not a customer segment.
That's a brainstorming session.
And brainstorming doesn't get you meetings.
December 31, 2025 at 7:13 PM
Most academic entrepreneurs answer "who's your customer?" by listing possibilities:
"Healthcare systems, manufacturers, government agencies..."
That's not a customer segment.
That's a brainstorming session.
And brainstorming doesn't get you meetings.
"Healthcare systems, manufacturers, government agencies..."
That's not a customer segment.
That's a brainstorming session.
And brainstorming doesn't get you meetings.
👉Academic research starts with:
"What hasn't been studied?"
👉Commercial work starts with:
"Who's losing money because this doesn't exist yet?"
💡Same brain, different question.
"What hasn't been studied?"
👉Commercial work starts with:
"Who's losing money because this doesn't exist yet?"
💡Same brain, different question.
December 30, 2025 at 6:35 PM
👉Academic research starts with:
"What hasn't been studied?"
👉Commercial work starts with:
"Who's losing money because this doesn't exist yet?"
💡Same brain, different question.
"What hasn't been studied?"
👉Commercial work starts with:
"Who's losing money because this doesn't exist yet?"
💡Same brain, different question.
You can't validate a market by pointing to potential applications.
You validate it by finding actual people who say: "Yes, this is a problem I have right now, and here's what I'm currently doing about it."
👉 Learn more in this week's newsletter:
thespinout.substack.com/p/who-actual...
You validate it by finding actual people who say: "Yes, this is a problem I have right now, and here's what I'm currently doing about it."
👉 Learn more in this week's newsletter:
thespinout.substack.com/p/who-actual...
Who actually has your problem?
You can't sell to "someone who needs this."
thespinout.substack.com
December 29, 2025 at 11:49 PM
You can't validate a market by pointing to potential applications.
You validate it by finding actual people who say: "Yes, this is a problem I have right now, and here's what I'm currently doing about it."
👉 Learn more in this week's newsletter:
thespinout.substack.com/p/who-actual...
You validate it by finding actual people who say: "Yes, this is a problem I have right now, and here's what I'm currently doing about it."
👉 Learn more in this week's newsletter:
thespinout.substack.com/p/who-actual...
Your research is too important to stay trapped in academic language:
🌍 The world needs what you're building.
💡 They just need you to explain it in words they understand.
🤔 That's not dumbing down.
✅ That's translation.
🗝️ And it's the unlock for everything else.
🌍 The world needs what you're building.
💡 They just need you to explain it in words they understand.
🤔 That's not dumbing down.
✅ That's translation.
🗝️ And it's the unlock for everything else.
December 28, 2025 at 8:58 PM
Your research is too important to stay trapped in academic language:
🌍 The world needs what you're building.
💡 They just need you to explain it in words they understand.
🤔 That's not dumbing down.
✅ That's translation.
🗝️ And it's the unlock for everything else.
🌍 The world needs what you're building.
💡 They just need you to explain it in words they understand.
🤔 That's not dumbing down.
✅ That's translation.
🗝️ And it's the unlock for everything else.
What makes a pocket pitch work:
1️⃣ Starts with problem, not credentials
2️⃣ Uses plain language (minimal jargon)
3️⃣ Focuses on outcomes, not methodology
4️⃣ Builds credibility gradually
5️⃣ Ends with clear next step
If your pitch checks these boxes, you're 80% there.
1️⃣ Starts with problem, not credentials
2️⃣ Uses plain language (minimal jargon)
3️⃣ Focuses on outcomes, not methodology
4️⃣ Builds credibility gradually
5️⃣ Ends with clear next step
If your pitch checks these boxes, you're 80% there.
December 28, 2025 at 12:40 AM
What makes a pocket pitch work:
1️⃣ Starts with problem, not credentials
2️⃣ Uses plain language (minimal jargon)
3️⃣ Focuses on outcomes, not methodology
4️⃣ Builds credibility gradually
5️⃣ Ends with clear next step
If your pitch checks these boxes, you're 80% there.
1️⃣ Starts with problem, not credentials
2️⃣ Uses plain language (minimal jargon)
3️⃣ Focuses on outcomes, not methodology
4️⃣ Builds credibility gradually
5️⃣ Ends with clear next step
If your pitch checks these boxes, you're 80% there.
Translation isn't a one-time thing.
You write your pitch. Test it. Watch where people's eyes glaze over. Adjust.
Repeat.
The professors who are great at pitching?
They've practiced. A lot.
Translation is a skill. Skills require practice.
You write your pitch. Test it. Watch where people's eyes glaze over. Adjust.
Repeat.
The professors who are great at pitching?
They've practiced. A lot.
Translation is a skill. Skills require practice.
December 27, 2025 at 12:42 AM
Translation isn't a one-time thing.
You write your pitch. Test it. Watch where people's eyes glaze over. Adjust.
Repeat.
The professors who are great at pitching?
They've practiced. A lot.
Translation is a skill. Skills require practice.
You write your pitch. Test it. Watch where people's eyes glaze over. Adjust.
Repeat.
The professors who are great at pitching?
They've practiced. A lot.
Translation is a skill. Skills require practice.
"This sounds too technical for the market."
Translation:
"Can you explain this to normal people?"
The answer isn't to simplify your science.
It's to lead with outcomes, not process.
Customers don't need to understand HOW it works. They need to understand WHAT it does for them.
Translation:
"Can you explain this to normal people?"
The answer isn't to simplify your science.
It's to lead with outcomes, not process.
Customers don't need to understand HOW it works. They need to understand WHAT it does for them.
December 26, 2025 at 1:03 AM
"This sounds too technical for the market."
Translation:
"Can you explain this to normal people?"
The answer isn't to simplify your science.
It's to lead with outcomes, not process.
Customers don't need to understand HOW it works. They need to understand WHAT it does for them.
Translation:
"Can you explain this to normal people?"
The answer isn't to simplify your science.
It's to lead with outcomes, not process.
Customers don't need to understand HOW it works. They need to understand WHAT it does for them.
Pocket pitch structure (8-10 minutes):
1️⃣ The problem (60 sec)
2️⃣ Why current solutions fail (60 sec)
3️⃣ Your insight (90 sec)
4️⃣ How it works (2-3 min)
5️⃣ The impact (90 sec)
6️⃣ Your traction (60-90 sec)
7️⃣ The ask (30 sec)
Simple. Repeatable. Effective.
1️⃣ The problem (60 sec)
2️⃣ Why current solutions fail (60 sec)
3️⃣ Your insight (90 sec)
4️⃣ How it works (2-3 min)
5️⃣ The impact (90 sec)
6️⃣ Your traction (60-90 sec)
7️⃣ The ask (30 sec)
Simple. Repeatable. Effective.
December 24, 2025 at 7:25 PM
Pocket pitch structure (8-10 minutes):
1️⃣ The problem (60 sec)
2️⃣ Why current solutions fail (60 sec)
3️⃣ Your insight (90 sec)
4️⃣ How it works (2-3 min)
5️⃣ The impact (90 sec)
6️⃣ Your traction (60-90 sec)
7️⃣ The ask (30 sec)
Simple. Repeatable. Effective.
1️⃣ The problem (60 sec)
2️⃣ Why current solutions fail (60 sec)
3️⃣ Your insight (90 sec)
4️⃣ How it works (2-3 min)
5️⃣ The impact (90 sec)
6️⃣ Your traction (60-90 sec)
7️⃣ The ask (30 sec)
Simple. Repeatable. Effective.
Your elevator pitch keeps failing because you're starting in the wrong place.
You're leading with methodology, credentials, and what you built.
But your audience doesn't care yet.
Start with the problem they already understand.
Then introduce your solution.
You're leading with methodology, credentials, and what you built.
But your audience doesn't care yet.
Start with the problem they already understand.
Then introduce your solution.
December 23, 2025 at 5:42 PM
Your elevator pitch keeps failing because you're starting in the wrong place.
You're leading with methodology, credentials, and what you built.
But your audience doesn't care yet.
Start with the problem they already understand.
Then introduce your solution.
You're leading with methodology, credentials, and what you built.
But your audience doesn't care yet.
Start with the problem they already understand.
Then introduce your solution.
Can you explain your research clearly in 15 minutes to someone who's never read an academic paper?
If not, you don't have a positioning problem.
You have a clarity problem.
New newsletter: the pocket pitch framework 👉 thespinout.substack.com/p/your-first...
If not, you don't have a positioning problem.
You have a clarity problem.
New newsletter: the pocket pitch framework 👉 thespinout.substack.com/p/your-first...
Your First 15 Minutes
If you can't explain your work in 15 minutes, you don't have a business yet.
thespinout.substack.com
December 23, 2025 at 3:41 AM
Can you explain your research clearly in 15 minutes to someone who's never read an academic paper?
If not, you don't have a positioning problem.
You have a clarity problem.
New newsletter: the pocket pitch framework 👉 thespinout.substack.com/p/your-first...
If not, you don't have a positioning problem.
You have a clarity problem.
New newsletter: the pocket pitch framework 👉 thespinout.substack.com/p/your-first...
Once you bridge the credibility gap, your academic rigor becomes your competitive advantage.
Investors often trust academics MORE than typical founders once you demonstrate market proof.
This is because they know you won't try to wow them with hand-wavy but unsubstantiated claims.
Investors often trust academics MORE than typical founders once you demonstrate market proof.
This is because they know you won't try to wow them with hand-wavy but unsubstantiated claims.
December 22, 2025 at 12:37 AM
Once you bridge the credibility gap, your academic rigor becomes your competitive advantage.
Investors often trust academics MORE than typical founders once you demonstrate market proof.
This is because they know you won't try to wow them with hand-wavy but unsubstantiated claims.
Investors often trust academics MORE than typical founders once you demonstrate market proof.
This is because they know you won't try to wow them with hand-wavy but unsubstantiated claims.
A simple calendar to consider the path from scientific validation to market proof:
Months 1-2: Build technical validation
Months 3-4: Identify pilot partners
Months 5-7: Run pilots
Months 8-9: Collect testimonials/LOIs
Months 10-12: Convert to paying customers
At each stage, your pitch evolves.
Months 1-2: Build technical validation
Months 3-4: Identify pilot partners
Months 5-7: Run pilots
Months 8-9: Collect testimonials/LOIs
Months 10-12: Convert to paying customers
At each stage, your pitch evolves.
December 21, 2025 at 4:35 PM
A simple calendar to consider the path from scientific validation to market proof:
Months 1-2: Build technical validation
Months 3-4: Identify pilot partners
Months 5-7: Run pilots
Months 8-9: Collect testimonials/LOIs
Months 10-12: Convert to paying customers
At each stage, your pitch evolves.
Months 1-2: Build technical validation
Months 3-4: Identify pilot partners
Months 5-7: Run pilots
Months 8-9: Collect testimonials/LOIs
Months 10-12: Convert to paying customers
At each stage, your pitch evolves.
Academic proof answers: "Is this scientifically valid?"
Market proof answers: "Will this work in my situation, and is it worth the risk?"
Different questions require different proof.
Your job is to translate scientific validation into market terms while building actual market interest.
Market proof answers: "Will this work in my situation, and is it worth the risk?"
Different questions require different proof.
Your job is to translate scientific validation into market terms while building actual market interest.
December 19, 2025 at 6:14 PM
Academic proof answers: "Is this scientifically valid?"
Market proof answers: "Will this work in my situation, and is it worth the risk?"
Different questions require different proof.
Your job is to translate scientific validation into market terms while building actual market interest.
Market proof answers: "Will this work in my situation, and is it worth the risk?"
Different questions require different proof.
Your job is to translate scientific validation into market terms while building actual market interest.
You might not have paying customers yet.
But you probably have something:
➡️Pilot partnerships
➡️Letters of intent
➡️Grant funding
➡️Advisor endorsements
➡️Early customer conversations
Stack these. Together, they reduce skepticism and show you understand what proof you're building toward.
But you probably have something:
➡️Pilot partnerships
➡️Letters of intent
➡️Grant funding
➡️Advisor endorsements
➡️Early customer conversations
Stack these. Together, they reduce skepticism and show you understand what proof you're building toward.
December 18, 2025 at 5:26 PM
You might not have paying customers yet.
But you probably have something:
➡️Pilot partnerships
➡️Letters of intent
➡️Grant funding
➡️Advisor endorsements
➡️Early customer conversations
Stack these. Together, they reduce skepticism and show you understand what proof you're building toward.
But you probably have something:
➡️Pilot partnerships
➡️Letters of intent
➡️Grant funding
➡️Advisor endorsements
➡️Early customer conversations
Stack these. Together, they reduce skepticism and show you understand what proof you're building toward.
"Have you sold anything yet?"
It's a question every academic entrepreneur dreads.
Here's an example answer when you're pre-revenue:
🧵
It's a question every academic entrepreneur dreads.
Here's an example answer when you're pre-revenue:
🧵
December 17, 2025 at 9:21 PM
"Have you sold anything yet?"
It's a question every academic entrepreneur dreads.
Here's an example answer when you're pre-revenue:
🧵
It's a question every academic entrepreneur dreads.
Here's an example answer when you're pre-revenue:
🧵