3 ms·

Answer: Look for technical co-founders I'm joking, but seriously, those first 8 bullet points are nothing that technical founders can't do. And if I was workin

by sayemm 15y ago

Answer: Look for technical co-founders I'm joking, but seriously, those first 8 bullet points are nothing that technical founders can't do. And if I was working on a startup, it really wouldn't make sense to me to give someone co-founder equity to do just those 8 things that I could easily do myself while building the product too.

coryl 15y ago
"easily do myself while building the product too" Depends on the scale and product. IMO having developers do things outside of development (aka distractions) is a big waste in the early stages.
dasil003 15y ago
> it really wouldn't make sense to me to give someone co-founder equity The problem is you're thinking of your co-founder as some kind of technical-coattail-rider. But ideally your co-founder is better than you at product and market research, dealmaking, finding advisors and general networking. Your argument only applies to the all-around inferior co-founder, in which case no you shouldn't "give them co-founder equity" regardless of whether they are technical or not.
- sayemm 15y ago
  You're right, I am biased here - the reason being is because I actually used to be a "business guy" before, worked in finance and have since turned into a coder, and I've also failed. Because of that my standards for a business guy are extremely high, if I was ever even thinking of linking up with one early on, because of my background and experiences. Though I'll also argue that all else being equal hacker founders have a huge leg-up over non-tech founders for executing and surviving, esp these days. Online marketing, iterating, and design are all technical in nature and if you're a business guy, it's likely going to be your first time going through these sort of hurdles, big risk.
  - earbitscom 15y ago
    Your standards for any co-founder should be very high. I have to agree with dasil003. You're making all kinds of biased and unfounded assumptions about basically half of the world of founders. Saying that online marketing is technical in nature and that a business person probably has no prior experience doesn't make any sense to me. I don't know any hackers who have the depth of marketing experience that I have, and very few who have managed as many people across as many types of job functions, which is crucial to running an entire business. That being said, our technical founder is obviously crucial, as is the founder in charge of our music department. Every founder should bring something important to the table, and most founders are no good on their own.
pacemkr 15y ago
In my opinion, for a two person team, both have to be technical founders and at least one of them has to have some product sense to build anything useful. For a three person team, however, you can afford a dedicated business person. There is certainly value in having somebody around who is _willing_ and is _looking forward to_ taking on all of these things. Having said that, to me a business guy is defined by his experience. Loosely defined, I can call myself a business guy just because I'm willing to take on responsibilities that are not coding. And I believe I will be as good (and bad) as any other inexperienced business guy. Our respective backgrounds and education will mean absolutely squat when it comes down to getting the business off the ground. This is why a business guy with no experience is just an empty term to me. Until he has started and ran a business he is no more of a "business guy" than I -- we're both just "aspiring businessmen" and only one of us can code.
- sayemm 15y ago
  Agreed. I think one of the best posts ever on startup advice was by @yegg in "Paths to $5M for a startup founder" - http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2010/06/paths-to-5m-for-a-startup-founder.html http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2010/06/paths-to-5m-for-... The biggest dilution comes from co-founders and it's so very important to keep the team lean with people who can out-execute competition.
scottkduncan 15y ago
Don't ignore the opportunity cost of that approach. Every hour you spend on those eight things is an hour you could have spent developing the product.

by sayemm 15y ago

coryl 15y ago

"easily do myself while building the product too" Depends on the scale and product. IMO having developers do things outside of development (aka distractions) is a big waste in the early stages.

dasil003 15y ago

> it really wouldn't make sense to me to give someone co-founder equity The problem is you're thinking of your co-founder as some kind of technical-coattail-rider. But ideally your co-founder is better than you at product and market research, dealmaking, finding advisors and general networking. Your argument only applies to the all-around inferior co-founder, in which case no you shouldn't "give them co-founder equity" regardless of whether they are technical or not.

sayemm 15y ago
You're right, I am biased here - the reason being is because I actually used to be a "business guy" before, worked in finance and have since turned into a coder, and I've also failed. Because of that my standards for a business guy are extremely high, if I was ever even thinking of linking up with one early on, because of my background and experiences. Though I'll also argue that all else being equal hacker founders have a huge leg-up over non-tech founders for executing and surviving, esp these days. Online marketing, iterating, and design are all technical in nature and if you're a business guy, it's likely going to be your first time going through these sort of hurdles, big risk.
- earbitscom 15y ago
  Your standards for any co-founder should be very high. I have to agree with dasil003. You're making all kinds of biased and unfounded assumptions about basically half of the world of founders. Saying that online marketing is technical in nature and that a business person probably has no prior experience doesn't make any sense to me. I don't know any hackers who have the depth of marketing experience that I have, and very few who have managed as many people across as many types of job functions, which is crucial to running an entire business. That being said, our technical founder is obviously crucial, as is the founder in charge of our music department. Every founder should bring something important to the table, and most founders are no good on their own.

pacemkr 15y ago

In my opinion, for a two person team, both have to be technical founders and at least one of them has to have some product sense to build anything useful. For a three person team, however, you can afford a dedicated business person. There is certainly value in having somebody around who is _willing_ and is _looking forward to_ taking on all of these things. Having said that, to me a business guy is defined by his experience. Loosely defined, I can call myself a business guy just because I'm willing to take on responsibilities that are not coding. And I believe I will be as good (and bad) as any other inexperienced business guy. Our respective backgrounds and education will mean absolutely squat when it comes down to getting the business off the ground. This is why a business guy with no experience is just an empty term to me. Until he has started and ran a business he is no more of a "business guy" than I -- we're both just "aspiring businessmen" and only one of us can code.

sayemm 15y ago
Agreed. I think one of the best posts ever on startup advice was by @yegg in "Paths to $5M for a startup founder" - http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2010/06/paths-to-5m-for-a-startup-founder.html http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2010/06/paths-to-5m-for-... The biggest dilution comes from co-founders and it's so very important to keep the team lean with people who can out-execute competition.

scottkduncan 15y ago

Don't ignore the opportunity cost of that approach. Every hour you spend on those eight things is an hour you could have spent developing the product.