Over the past few weeks, I’ve had the chance to mentor several early-stage fintech founders—some still at idea stage, some with a rough prototype, all incredibly passionate. These conversations stirred up a lot of memories from my own early days as a founder: the scrappiness, the uncertainty, the optimism (and delusion), and the invisible walls you only discover once you run straight into them.

This is not advice from someone claiming to have it all figured out.

This is more of a conversation I wish someone had with me years ago—before I burned time, money, and energy learning these the hard way. Especially if you come from a polished professional background or from academia or consulting (hi, MBA world), you may think you can “strategize” your way into building a product. I certainly did. And reality humbled me—fast.

Across the teams I’ve been speaking with recently, I started noticing a few recurring patterns. These aren’t judgments. They’re just… real. And I share them because I recognize myself in every one of them.

1. The Mindset Gap: Still Thinking Like an Employee, Not a Founder

It’s surprisingly common: a founder with a great idea expects counterparts—banks, corporates, investors—to “see the value” and adjust to them.
I used to think this way too.

But here’s the truth no one tells you early on:
No one is obligated to work with you just because your solution is “better.”
They were doing just fine before you showed up.

Take the legal-financing idea I recently heard in a mentorship session. The founder kept waiting for the “right” counterparty to agree to his terms, frustrated that no one understood his value. But the reality is: it’s not their job to accommodate you. It’s your job to make the path frictionless for them.

A better mindset for founders is to constantly ask:

“What do you need from us before we can sign an LOI?”

“If you agree this saves you cost, what’s preventing you from trying it now?”

“Who else needs to be in the room for internal approval? Should we do a joint session?”

Founders who remove roadblocks get momentum.
Founders who insist others bend to them… get stuck.

2. Resource Shock: Still Expecting Corporate-Level Support

Many early founders come from banking, consulting, academia, government, or big tech. They’re used to:

• asking for resources,

• getting budget,

• escalating when things stall,

• and having a brand name (Google, Meta, Goldman, Harvard, MIT, you name it) behind them that opens doors.

Then they become founders… and everything disappears overnight.

You don’t have a $100M marketing budget.
You don’t have a compliance department.
You don’t have a brand that impresses anyone.
Most of the time, it’s just you (plus a supportive friend or two, if you’re lucky).

Your job as a founder is to find the fastest, cheapest, scrappiest path to a result—not the “proper” path you used in corporate life.

One founder I worked with kept saying he needed a strong CTO to build, marketing budget to push the product, designer to sketch the prototype before he could start building. He was paralyzed by all the things he didn’t have.

But here’s the entrepreneurial truth:
You will always lack something—capital, skills, time, infrastructure.

The winners are the ones who refuse to make themselves dependent on constraints.
They find alternatives:

No technical skills? Recruit someone, even if it means giving equity.

No capital? Apply for grants, negotiate partnerships, strip down the scope, knocking doors…

No infrastructure? Build a workaround, even if it’s manual at first (and maybe not the perfect version you’re used to in your old corporate days). 

The goal isn’t to be perfect.
The goal is to remove as many constraints as possible so your success rate goes up.

3. Building For “Someday,” Not For Today

This one hits close to home.
I’ve met founders building great concepts—proven models in other countries, real market need, clear demand—yet completely stuck because they’re waiting for “the infrastructure to be ready.”

A recent example: a budgeting app that depends on open-banking regulation and APIs. It’s a solid idea. Many global success stories to learn from. Huge potential.

But here’s the problem:
There’s no prototype. No user testing. No early traction. Everything is hypothetical.

And the founder is waiting until “the rails are ready.”

Meanwhile:

large corporates are also waiting,

well-resourced teams are waiting,

competitors with unlimited budgets are waiting.

If you’re waiting too…
you’ve already lost your only real competitive edge: timing.

When the infrastructure finally becomes available, all those larger players will move instantly. They have capital, brand, distribution, and execution muscles you cannot compete with.

What you can compete with—what no one can buy—is being early.

If you want to win:

Don’t wait for regulations.

Don’t wait for APIs.

Don’t wait for the perfect technical environment.

Start today with whatever you can build:

bank-statement uploads,

manual categorization,

early user interviews,

simple dashboards,

basic value tests.

Timing is your only unfair advantage.
Once open banking is ready, it’s too late to become the first mover—not even the scrappiest founder can outrun a corporate with a $50M budget.

For Anyone Building in the Dark

These lessons aren’t criticisms. They’re reminders—mostly to myself.

I’ve made every one of these mistakes.
I’ve over-analyzed. I’ve waited too long to ship my first crappy version. I’ve expected others to adjust to me. I’ve clung to the “professional” way of doing things because that’s all I knew.

But building something from nothing requires a different operating system.

One that’s humbler, scrappier, more experimental, and more willing to move without perfect information.

If you’re in the early days of building, just know this:
You’re not supposed to have it figured out. But you are supposed to move.
And the earlier you shed the expectations and habits of your past roles, the faster you’ll see possibilities where others only see roadblocks.