>That said, because it's worker owned co-op vs an investor owned business there is potential to actually build "a customer centric company" ;) This is bc unlike

>That said, because it's worker owned co-op vs an investor owned business there is potential to actually build "a customer centric company" ;) This is bc unlike Amazon we aren't under same economic pressures as a typical VC or investor owned company. You're right. Your proposed worker-owned co-op still has economic pressure; it's just a different type of pressure: It is financially constrained by workers' savings to contribute capital. I made a previous comment about this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11166080 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11166080 But that limitation is ok if everyone involved understands how it puts a different financial risk on creating a viable business. So potential worker/members would need to know what a realistic capital contribution would be. $5000? $10000? And probably some "sweat equity" too. E.g. a programmer that could earn $200k salary from a business maybe needs to work for free to help build the co-cop from nothing. Therefore, a scenario is the programmers paying $5k into the business and with $0 income for several months to code the website, etc. That would be economic pressure for many people. Am I way off? What are your ideas to present a palatable (while also realistic) financial scenario to attract co-op members?