Before saying my piece let me point out that I'm someone who grew up around In-N-Out and who couldn't live without it. I know the secret menu and know how to find the Bible verses on the packaging. I've even ordered a Flying Dutchmann on occasion so I'm a huge fan.
But I don't think their success is of the type that most people here would be looking for. They are essentially a very large small business. They've expanded very slowly and to this day are only in 4 states (after 61 years in business)
Basically if you want to know how to build a successful niche look at In-N-Out. But anyone who wants a big success is better off looking at Mcdonalds (sad as that fact is)
I hate that get-rich get-huge mentality. It's seen here a lot, too. People want every one of their ideas to become globe-wide industries. Fact is, most ideas aren't good enough to grow that big, and that's not a bad thing. I'd rather be moderately rich with a cozy small company than ruin my idea by making it huge. In-N-Out is one of the few fast foods I'll permit myself, because they're so good.
I suppose there are a lot of reasons (see the other reply) but my thinking when posting was this:
In-N-Out is a burger joint with a niche meaning they have a few million customers. Those customers come by maybe once or twice a week to get a meal. Apply that same number of customers to the software industry and you'll have trouble surviving because they're either only going to pay you once or in the case of websites pay you little to nothing. So my conclusion was that an In-N-Out level success would not be what most software developers would be interested in.
So that was it. The logic isn't exactly air tight (if you want to be a one man show you could do perfectly well with a few million visitors) but it was what I meant when I posted
I disagree - I feel that in software if anything there's a huge amount of room for niche products.
My favourite story here is someone I know who runs an online drag-racing simulator game sort of thing. Lots of social interaction, trading parts, earning in-game money, etc, all subscription-based.
He doesn't have a huge number of players - but he's found enough die-hard supporters that he enjoys a very comfortable standard of living (certainly makes more than your average software engineer).
You don't need to make $0.01 from a million people if you can make $10 from 1000 people.
Oh, and there's more to software than the web - this is something that I think people are forgetting in the day and age of Google and Twitter.
I think a lot of us have seen successes like Bill Gates, pg, Larry & Sergey, Zuckerberg etc. We know we're smart and capable and that big success is a genuine possibility.
But we can also benefit from understanding the difference between Profit, Growth, and Profile - In-and-Out has taken profitability at the expense of Growth and Profile (I've never heard of them); McDonalds has Profile and Growth, but not so much profit.
The three aren't mutually exclusive, and we can have it all. I don't want it all myself; I look at examples like patio11 and go - 'That's pretty cool'. Niche success over Zuckerberg success works for me.
Why does one have to be above the other at all? Zuckerberg made something really cool. I'm of the stance that we should excuse the guy for his failings since he still ended up with a neat product. It's hardly his fault that Facebook became so popular.
Also: I don't think PG is quite on the same level of Gates, Zuck, and the Google guys. All three made a product that became an enormous success on their own. PG made an online store that another company bought. I'm not trying to insult him; in fact, that's a better person to run a company like YCombinator in the first place. PG is proof that you can succeed several times in your life without becoming a superstar.
I don't think one has to be above the others, but it's useful to think of them as three different options. Having all three is possible, but probably harder, so if you don't have a big vision pick the one that works best for you.
Zuckerberg, from accounts I've read, had a big vision, was clear on it early, and made it happen. I don't want that, and to be honest I probably couldn't make it happen even if I did. That's OK.
Re: pg, you're probably right. In this forum it was worth throwing his name out there, but I wouldn't use him as an example in other places where that list would be appropriate. Multiple successes - he's a good example to use, as you point out.
37 Signals and DHH have been pushing this brand of "build a business" success for tech startups for a few years now. There's good arguments for both concepts. And both can result in "big success".
An interesting contrast to In-N-Out is Five Guys (http://www.fiveguys.com), originally a DC-area regional chain. They're only 20-something years old, but they're opening new locations on seemingly a near-weekly basis.
It's arguable how much of a bond they've built with their customers, considering their rapid expansion, but when I ate at a recently opened one near Seattle, it was packed.
The common link, in my opinion, is that both chains go all out for quality (Five Guys, for instance, posts the city of origin of the potatoes used for their fries on a daily basis). And the food truly is on a different level versus your average fast food place. In the end, success for both seems to come down to the old maxim: make [burgers] people want.
I heard a lot about In and Out and went there when I was in Reno visiting friends. Unfortunately, In and Out's burger fell flat, as I was expecting it to taste better then Five Guys.
It made me wonder what all the In and Out buzz was about? Five Guys for me is the best burger joint!
Five guys is somewhere between gourmet and fast food. Five guys is definitely better, but In-N-Out gives you a good cheeseburger plus fries for 3.74. Ask for a cup of water.
"... starting store managers make $100,000, plus bonuses tied to store performance."
Did anybody else notice this and pause? That extra comma at the end was in the original article and made me think the whole number might be a typo, but wow. I hope the number is true.
But I don't think their success is of the type that most people here would be looking for. They are essentially a very large small business. They've expanded very slowly and to this day are only in 4 states (after 61 years in business)
Basically if you want to know how to build a successful niche look at In-N-Out. But anyone who wants a big success is better off looking at Mcdonalds (sad as that fact is)