I have to play devil's advocate here, because we know one side of the story. Perhaps the partner is not a crook, perhaps he was just not rich enough, hence why

I have to play devil's advocate here, because we know one side of the story. Perhaps the partner is not a crook, perhaps he was just not rich enough, hence why he was the recipient of a small salary in the first year and was unable to come up with further money to put into the company since his family didn't have any to risk, and why when the company generated actual revenue gave his family members opportunities to work with him. It sounds like the company's revenue consisted of one big customer and it folded when that customer was lost, but there's very little details of why that happened.