Am I the only one that really doesn't like Quora's answer summary? Especially for a question like this, because some (somewhat contrary) valuable opinions are essentially ignored in favor of a catchy one liner.
Agreed, the answer summary is very weak on this question and I've seen that on a lot of others too. Anybody can edit an answer summary to improve it, but I very rarely do: it's too hard to do justice to individual answers without imposing my own viewpoint. Also, they've set it up so there's a lot more incentive to put work into an individual answer than work on the summary.
No. I don't like it either. Primary because I'm a single founder and secondly because it does ignore the other opinions posted. Also I'm not going to give up or stop working on my product because I don't have a co-founder. Not to say I wouldn't take one or two on later if they can be a valuable asset to the company, just that this work must be done now and I'm the only one who showed up for work today.
"This work must be done now and I'm the only one who showed up for work today." Ergo, JFDI. That's a valuable outlook for anyone. Among single founders, it's baseline.
And I agree with the earlier posters - age is a big factor here, and not just because of the additional self-discipline and knowledge that it tends to produce. Assuming that you're starting something in a field you already know well, you probably have a lot of people you can call on for advice, help, resources, etc., not to mention more than a few credits in the favor bank. In other words, you're really not as solo as you were in your early 20's. Nor are you as likely to spend as much time trying to define your market, identify your customers, and work out your acquisition costs.
In other words, your need to iterate is probably a lot lower, since and older founder is more likely to be operating with a measure of specialized or otherwise hard-to-get insight, and are aiming for something specific that isn't low-hanging fruit, and that may depend - critically - on well established relationships.
From what I understand, the tech world is one of the few places where founders are commonly so young. I've lost the citation, but I believe the average age for start-up founders in the broader economy is 38.
Agreed. I'm 29 and have been doing real estate sales and mortgage origination for the past five years. I've always been a hacker, though admittedly much less so over the past few years. I'm scratching my own itch. Turns out it's a common itch in the real estate industry.
Not to say I wouldn't take one or two on later if they can be a valuable asset to the company, just that this work must be done now and I'm the only one who showed up for work today.
Same here, basically. I'm not opposed to joining up with a co-founder or two (in fact, I'm actively seeking them) but I'm not going to stop working just because it's only me at-the-moment. F%!# that.
How are you actively seeking them? I'm just curious because I'm sure I could be doing more.
Posting here on HN; tweeting; emailing old friends, former co-workers and asking them; standing up at meetings like TriJUG, TriLUG, etc. and announcing that I'm looking for a co-founder; hitting up the recruiters who call trying to recruit me; asking other local entrepreneurs; running a "Hackers & Founders" meetup, etc., etc.
And I do have a couple of irons in the fire, including one acquaintance I've known for a while, who is in graduate school and is interested in possibly joining me once he graduates in a month or so. Also one former co-worker who may be interested. It's been a slow process, but I'm not eager to jump in bed (so to speak) with just anybody either. I'm looking for somebody who's passionate about startup-life, willing to go "balls-out" to succeed, and - ideally - has a complementary skill-set to my own.
I don't like the answer summaries at all. Just when you found an interesting question and you're going to check who said what, the summary comes in and displays everything crammed up, according to the OP preferences.
I could never have gotten a co-founder. In the first place, I didn't know anyone. I had about zero technical skill, and knew I still had to develop biz dev / marketing skills, so I would have been embarrassed to front myself as a "non-technical founder" with a great idea.
After several years of learning the tools, I have more to offer, and I'm much more prepared to evaluate a potential co-founder. But that's only because I HAVE been doing it alone.
At the meta-level, this thread's an example of the potential of a system like Quora. It's been open for nine months and still attracts good new responses that get voted up. The brief bios add a lot, and so do the pictures. If you just want a quick answer, the top answer (or the top three) are fine; if you want to delve in more, all the different perspectives and experiences add a lot of value. Impressive.
Doing that worked well for me in my first company, which lasted 10 years. But I didn't get to that point on the second one and I burnt out working on it completely on my own. It was working, but still too early to hire and a cofounder would have definitely helped push on.
Had the wrong cofounder on the third one though, and I can't stress enough how important having the right cofounder is after that experience. It wasn't all bad, and could have been much worse, but enough to know how important a choice that is.
I've been in both situations. I've had cofounders, who weren't quite as motivated as me, at which point I felt, "I might as well have done this alone". Then I tried doing it myself and found myself overwhelmed and thinking "wouldn't it be nice to have some support". Wonder if there are any articles on how one could go about finding a good co-founder that you would "jive" with. BTW, which one is worse, going it alone or bad co-founder(s)?
I'd say bad cofounder, because you can find someone as a solo founder, but you have to first get rid of a bad cofounder (or put up with it).
I'd break it down into 3 things to look for in a cofounder: proof that they're hard-working, that they have complementary skills, and that you really gel with each other. Kinda gotta feel the last one out, but the others should show up in their past work and their work ethic.
For me, there is way too much to do. I think networking is about 2/3rds of a full-time job in itself. Hiring is a pain, even with the empirical approach of trying people out with contracting. I definitely could use a cofounder.
I agree with this. I'd love a co-founder who had the same passion, drive, work ethic and commitment to the company but I just haven't found them yet. It's also much easier to sever an employment relationship than one with a co-founder. On the other hand an employee collecting a salary is much more expensive than a co-founder working for equity.
It appears that the strong bias against single founders (at least from the investment community) may be softening a bit. In a recent talk at DogPatch Labs, Mark Suster advised starting a company on your own and then hiring a cofounder: http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-suster-entrepreneur-advi...
Being the technical co-founder I found it really helpful to get the manager / sales person onside.
He does all of the "help me understand" when things need clarity. He also keep me on track and not mucking around on the internet ( except the occasional hacker-news comment ;] )
Another bonus I have found is that having a non-technical mind allows him to put a unique perspective. One example is he wanted a list of all of the new pages on the internet every day ... I initially laughed at this, but after talking to him and going backwards and forwards his query turned back into a product that we ended up selling. I never would have thought of it had there not been his zany idea.
Coming from somebody who was the single founder for 5 months, I would say, much more difficult doing it yourself.
I'm in the same situation but am growing more unhappy with it as time passes. A close friend is CEO/Idea Person/Sales Person with myself doing the development. A few big challenges I'm running into are:
- rudimentary stuff like web copy updates inevitably have to be done by me making it feel like I'm a glorified gopher
- a total lack of understanding on their part about the technology we're using (web apps, Facebook apps, UX, etc.) and lack of willingness to learn/contribute somewhere there
- a fixation with networking and building relationships as opposed to contributing directly to the product. Not one of these contacts has significantly impacted our product or bottom line despite numerous meetings, coffees, etc.
- big disagreements over our financial model. I advocated pursuing revenue immediately from day one vs. the "let's grow a big audience and figure out how to monetize later." This was a big source of tension. It took over a year for this person to realize our acquisition/monetization ratio was completely FUBAR before we "pivoted" to an actual revenue model. Now we're playing catch up.
- serious damage to our friendship. Now we only talk during the work week, never outside of it.
I give this person credit for raising the initial funding, however, I can't help but wonder if I'd be better off solo and trying to find a cofounder later as Mark Suster's article mentions. Part of me wants to walk, but another part feels like I should just suck it up and see it through until the end.
I'm sorry. That's a really hard position to be in.
On another note what does "sucking it up until the end" entail? Where is the end? What happens when you get there? Lastly, what's the worst thing that would happen if you were to walk away?
Just some questions that popped into my mind. Hopefully you find them useful. Best of luck.
One of the problems that I have is that I am considered a "non-technical" person because I am not a coder, yet I AM very technical. I have very good technical skills - but they are not around development.
I am fixing that now though by learning to code - but at the same time, people need to also recognize that non-technical does NOT immediately mean "Marketing/MBA".
It depends on the type of startup, your own skills and stress tolerance level.I would support going at it alone ,if its possible to do so and circumstances permit. Whats the point of trying to get people on board as cofounders is you the only one who has the vision.Those people will not be motivated as you are and wont be so passionate.
If a single person builds the 1st version of the application and gets the first 20 or so paying customers, is the 2nd person to work with the 1st person considered a founder?
I guess I'm just not sure where the line is drawn between a founder and the 1st employee
The line is drawn by agreement. The relationship is explicitly specified. It would be foolish on the part of either of them to not be clear on this point.
So, when people submit these Quora links, do we answer the Quora question here on HN, or answer on Quora and have a meta-discussion about Quora here on HN? (LOL)
I wonder if age and experience might be a component here. A lot of the internet startups quoted as examples of two founders being ideal were founded by really young people. In that context having support might be an absolute necessity. How does that compare with more experienced individuals in their 30's?
Having been a solo founder all my life I know just how hard it can be. I would not wish some of the lows I have had to navigate on my worst enemy.
If you are unfortunate enough to be in really difficult situations you really need the intestinal fortitude and mental stability to deal with life-changing problems. Few people in their early 20's have had enough life experience to have developed these qualities.
The problem with the co-founder model is that when life is peachy everyone is working hard and having a good time. However, when things turn ugly if all founders are not equipped to manage the situation it can easily turn in to a nightmare. Things like not being able to make payroll, facing lawsuits, facing bankruptcy, catastrophic supply chain problems (manufacturing), etc. can easily create a set of conditions that can break apart a partnership that was great during good times.
While I will not dispute that having like-minded co-founders can be an advantage, I am of the opinion that --for a certain type of businesses-- I'd rather go solo than run the risk of partnering with someone who might become my worst enemy when things become difficult. The right partner, however, can be an incredible asset, no question about it.
I don't think there's an easy universal answer to this question.
My biggest problem with Quora is that the answers tend to be from people that aren't relevant. If you are asking about single-founder startups, why are the top answers from 2-founder startups? There is lots of information out there on 2-founder startups, written by co-founders. I went to that thread looking for first-hand accounts from a single-founder, someone who the question was actually intended for.
This problem also came up the other day in the 'what skills do self-taught programmers lack'. I am a self-taught programmer and I don't care how many engineers you have managed, you can never actually understand what skills I lack. That thread should have been a bunch of auto-didacts explaining what they've had problems with over the years. Instead it read as a bunch of cs majors listing out the cs curricula from their schools.
After reading through all the answers, I've come to the conclusion that Quora is the most vapid, rockstar oriented community ever. To everyone who claims the HN community is dying, go read quora. It's all about me-too posts (which is evidenced by the fact that this post consists of 40 PG regurgitations and ~5 great answers), where the biggest rockstars get voted up the highest. At least HN still has deep, contextual discussion.
PG describes that the emotional lows of a startup are dulled with the support of a cofounder. Having very supportive and interested friends helps this as well, although probably not as much.
How many are there, anyways? It's always been Gates and Allen, the two Steves, Sergei and Larry, Yang and Filo, even Zuckerberg and Saverin(?) Are there any renown tech startups that had a single founder?
38 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 84.1 ms ] threadAnd I agree with the earlier posters - age is a big factor here, and not just because of the additional self-discipline and knowledge that it tends to produce. Assuming that you're starting something in a field you already know well, you probably have a lot of people you can call on for advice, help, resources, etc., not to mention more than a few credits in the favor bank. In other words, you're really not as solo as you were in your early 20's. Nor are you as likely to spend as much time trying to define your market, identify your customers, and work out your acquisition costs.
In other words, your need to iterate is probably a lot lower, since and older founder is more likely to be operating with a measure of specialized or otherwise hard-to-get insight, and are aiming for something specific that isn't low-hanging fruit, and that may depend - critically - on well established relationships.
From what I understand, the tech world is one of the few places where founders are commonly so young. I've lost the citation, but I believe the average age for start-up founders in the broader economy is 38.
Same here, basically. I'm not opposed to joining up with a co-founder or two (in fact, I'm actively seeking them) but I'm not going to stop working just because it's only me at-the-moment. F%!# that.
Posting here on HN; tweeting; emailing old friends, former co-workers and asking them; standing up at meetings like TriJUG, TriLUG, etc. and announcing that I'm looking for a co-founder; hitting up the recruiters who call trying to recruit me; asking other local entrepreneurs; running a "Hackers & Founders" meetup, etc., etc.
And I do have a couple of irons in the fire, including one acquaintance I've known for a while, who is in graduate school and is interested in possibly joining me once he graduates in a month or so. Also one former co-worker who may be interested. It's been a slow process, but I'm not eager to jump in bed (so to speak) with just anybody either. I'm looking for somebody who's passionate about startup-life, willing to go "balls-out" to succeed, and - ideally - has a complementary skill-set to my own.
After several years of learning the tools, I have more to offer, and I'm much more prepared to evaluate a potential co-founder. But that's only because I HAVE been doing it alone.
Had the wrong cofounder on the third one though, and I can't stress enough how important having the right cofounder is after that experience. It wasn't all bad, and could have been much worse, but enough to know how important a choice that is.
I'd break it down into 3 things to look for in a cofounder: proof that they're hard-working, that they have complementary skills, and that you really gel with each other. Kinda gotta feel the last one out, but the others should show up in their past work and their work ethic.
He does all of the "help me understand" when things need clarity. He also keep me on track and not mucking around on the internet ( except the occasional hacker-news comment ;] )
Another bonus I have found is that having a non-technical mind allows him to put a unique perspective. One example is he wanted a list of all of the new pages on the internet every day ... I initially laughed at this, but after talking to him and going backwards and forwards his query turned back into a product that we ended up selling. I never would have thought of it had there not been his zany idea.
Coming from somebody who was the single founder for 5 months, I would say, much more difficult doing it yourself.
- rudimentary stuff like web copy updates inevitably have to be done by me making it feel like I'm a glorified gopher
- a total lack of understanding on their part about the technology we're using (web apps, Facebook apps, UX, etc.) and lack of willingness to learn/contribute somewhere there
- a fixation with networking and building relationships as opposed to contributing directly to the product. Not one of these contacts has significantly impacted our product or bottom line despite numerous meetings, coffees, etc.
- big disagreements over our financial model. I advocated pursuing revenue immediately from day one vs. the "let's grow a big audience and figure out how to monetize later." This was a big source of tension. It took over a year for this person to realize our acquisition/monetization ratio was completely FUBAR before we "pivoted" to an actual revenue model. Now we're playing catch up.
- serious damage to our friendship. Now we only talk during the work week, never outside of it.
I give this person credit for raising the initial funding, however, I can't help but wonder if I'd be better off solo and trying to find a cofounder later as Mark Suster's article mentions. Part of me wants to walk, but another part feels like I should just suck it up and see it through until the end.
On another note what does "sucking it up until the end" entail? Where is the end? What happens when you get there? Lastly, what's the worst thing that would happen if you were to walk away?
Just some questions that popped into my mind. Hopefully you find them useful. Best of luck.
I am fixing that now though by learning to code - but at the same time, people need to also recognize that non-technical does NOT immediately mean "Marketing/MBA".
Everyone is/should be Sales though.
I guess I'm just not sure where the line is drawn between a founder and the 1st employee
With some companies, that first employee can be a bit of a hybrid (taking a crappy salary and a non-trivial bit of equity).
Percentage of singe-founder startup discussion: 59.5%
Percentage of meta Quora / question format discussion: 40.5%
The people have spoken.
Having been a solo founder all my life I know just how hard it can be. I would not wish some of the lows I have had to navigate on my worst enemy.
If you are unfortunate enough to be in really difficult situations you really need the intestinal fortitude and mental stability to deal with life-changing problems. Few people in their early 20's have had enough life experience to have developed these qualities.
The problem with the co-founder model is that when life is peachy everyone is working hard and having a good time. However, when things turn ugly if all founders are not equipped to manage the situation it can easily turn in to a nightmare. Things like not being able to make payroll, facing lawsuits, facing bankruptcy, catastrophic supply chain problems (manufacturing), etc. can easily create a set of conditions that can break apart a partnership that was great during good times.
While I will not dispute that having like-minded co-founders can be an advantage, I am of the opinion that --for a certain type of businesses-- I'd rather go solo than run the risk of partnering with someone who might become my worst enemy when things become difficult. The right partner, however, can be an incredible asset, no question about it.
I don't think there's an easy universal answer to this question.
This problem also came up the other day in the 'what skills do self-taught programmers lack'. I am a self-taught programmer and I don't care how many engineers you have managed, you can never actually understand what skills I lack. That thread should have been a bunch of auto-didacts explaining what they've had problems with over the years. Instead it read as a bunch of cs majors listing out the cs curricula from their schools.