I think that's too harsh. The book has more "micro" errors than I'd like to see. By "micro" errors I mean some poorly drawn diagrams and some grammar errors that break my flow. I noticed that no editor is credited, and the book would be improved with an editor. Too many micro errors can hurt a books credibility (if they didn't take the time to polish the book can I really trust the content?).

On the other hand, I think the advice in this book is fantastic. Two examples of things discussed:

1) Deciding what type of market you are entering (existing, re-segmented, new) and the consequences of each market type.

2) Confirming your hypothesis before you try to scale.

Get past the micro errors. The content really is quite good. Or I think it's good. What the hell do I know. There's a scene in Moonstruck where one of the characters seeks advice until she gets the answer she wanted to hear in the first place ('maybe they're afraid of dying?'). There may be some of that going on with me and this book.

My recollection was that the person was saying they liked the content, just that it lacked some polish.

Like I said though, that was just a vague notion I had. I haven't read the book, but do enjoy reading the stuff he posts to his site a lot.