Why Larry Wrote a Sequel Instead of an Original

Larry has a specific word for what his book is: not an original, a sequel, and this chapter’s territory is why he thinks that is the smarter move. His framework calls this the franchise, non-literal, meaning you replicate a proven concept as a new installment instead of paying to license it or inventing a category. He points to nightlife and television for the pattern: Tao opens the same club concept city to city, and CSI runs the same show format in a new city each season.

Neither example pays a franchise fee in the traditional sense, and neither pretends to be the first of its kind, the value is in the proven format repeating well. Larry’s book follows the same logic: McCormack proved the format works, so the smart move was a sequel with new material, not a first attempt at reinventing the genre. An original risks being untested, a sequel risks being derivative, and Larry’s bet is that untested is the more expensive risk of the two.

This is the same instinct behind changing Harvard to Stanford in the title, keep what is proven, change what needs to be yours. A sequel also comes with an audience already primed to understand the format, so the energy goes into the content instead of explaining the structure from scratch.

Larry’s claim is that most people avoid sequels because they want credit for originality, and that trade costs them years they could have spent executing. Sell it first, then go make it, is the same principle applied to publishing, prove the demand exists for the format before writing the untested version.

The sequel framing is not modesty, it is a bet that a proven shell filled with new material beats a new shell with unproven material. Larry explains the Tao and CSI comparison himself in the video linked below.