4 ms·
With 2 co-founders, you have to agree on everything. That's hard. 3 co-founders let's you do a majority thing on decisions, but that IMO can easily turn into
by prirun 4y ago
With 2 co-founders, you have to agree on everything. That's hard. 3 co-founders let's you do a majority thing on decisions, but that IMO can easily turn into politics: you do this for me, I'll do that for you, we are better friends so you need to vote with me on this, etc.
Having previously started and exiting a 2-founder 50/50 business, I wouldn't do it again. I might give equity, but even that can be very tricky. See for example the case of Craigslist having a minority shareholder who sold his shares to eBay. The original minority shareholder may not have caused the other shareholders any problems, but having a large competing corporation as a minority shareholder is a whole 'nother thing.
- withinboredom 4y agoOof. I can’t imagine a 50/50 relationship. My marriage isn’t even 50/50, unless we are getting a divorce. In my marriage we each have “domains” that we are gods of. When it comes to money, she has domain over day-to-day expenses and I have control over making sure bills are paid and taxes are accounted for and we reconcile this fairly regularly. My point is, there has to be some kind of “tie-breaker” that isn’t biased/random. Whether that is a “fact” that something falls into someone’s “domain” or whether it’s a person. 50/50 just doesn’t seem realistic or a recipe for stress.