4 ms·

Is it just me or does the non-technical co-founder really get killed by most blogs? I have been approached a couple of times by friends with 'ideas', they just

Is it just me or does the non-technical co-founder really get killed by most blogs? I have been approached a couple of times by friends with 'ideas', they just need a programmer to build it for them. I respectfully declined each time and remain friends with these people. None of them ever got anywhere with their ideas. They never quit their day jobs, they never read the right blogs and books (even if I suggested, and in some cases bought copies of the books for them), they never raised funding, they never talked to customers, and they never found another programmer. They had absolutely no idea where to even begin on the business side of things, much less the engineering side. I think programmers get all hot and bothered by the idea of a 'non-technical' co-founder undervaluing their contribution and so we all love these posts. But really, most of the people saying they are 'looking for a technical co-founder' aren't just lacking the ability to code. They are lacking the ability to do a startup. Calling them 'non-technical co-founders' really is giving them a free pass. Most aren't ready to be co-founders, technical or not. It also really belittles a good business cofounder (lets not term it around what they can't do, but what they can do). A good business cofounder goes out and talks to customers, has a handle on the market, probably has a contact list full of potential partners or employees, can pitch, do some PR, and hopefully secure some funding. That is very valuable to a young startup, and most of the people with an idea and no coder aren't up to that level.

dangrover 14y ago
That's the point. Being good at PR, for instance, is a technical skill that can be demonstrated. It requires experience and knowledge. If you're "non-technical", though, and you don't actually have demonstrable skill in PR, it might as well be an engineer on your team working on PR stuff.
dsandrowitz 14y ago
Absolutely spot-on. I fall more on the non-technical side, but where I fall on the spectrum of tech skills really doesn't matter. All that counts is whether I can articulate my idea to a team (preferably by using my ancient coding skill and some ugly wireframes), work with them to make it a reality, and get shit done.
earbitscom 14y ago
This is the best articulation I've read on this debate, which I usually find filled with arrogance and condescension. Our company is what it is today because of our technology team, but by the time we found them we had money in the bank, boxes on boxes of CDs from record labels, an amazing advisory board (most of whom we cold called), and a blog with thousands of readers. We had mockups, all of our licensing agreements, and the list goes onm. Being a founder is about doing what it takes, and it takes a lot more than just building technology.
aaronblohowiak 14y ago
>Most aren't ready to be co-founders, technical or not. I think this is the crux of the matter. Most people aren't ready to be co-founders.
- rickdangerous1 14y ago
  The only way you can get ready to do a start up is to do a startup?????
  - briandear 14y ago
    No. But if you immerse yourself in the language, the business and the culture of startups, you can learn enough to give it a shot. There's more to startups that 'tech' -- basic business skills are seemingly underrated by so-called technical people. The question should never be 'can we build it', but 'can we sell it'. A startup is a business, designed to make money. Building something with no business plan can be cool and useful, but a project doesn't become a startup until the project turns into a product -- which is something that makes money.

dangrover 14y ago

That's the point. Being good at PR, for instance, is a technical skill that can be demonstrated. It requires experience and knowledge. If you're "non-technical", though, and you don't actually have demonstrable skill in PR, it might as well be an engineer on your team working on PR stuff.

dsandrowitz 14y ago

Absolutely spot-on. I fall more on the non-technical side, but where I fall on the spectrum of tech skills really doesn't matter. All that counts is whether I can articulate my idea to a team (preferably by using my ancient coding skill and some ugly wireframes), work with them to make it a reality, and get shit done.

earbitscom 14y ago

This is the best articulation I've read on this debate, which I usually find filled with arrogance and condescension. Our company is what it is today because of our technology team, but by the time we found them we had money in the bank, boxes on boxes of CDs from record labels, an amazing advisory board (most of whom we cold called), and a blog with thousands of readers. We had mockups, all of our licensing agreements, and the list goes onm. Being a founder is about doing what it takes, and it takes a lot more than just building technology.

aaronblohowiak 14y ago

>Most aren't ready to be co-founders, technical or not. I think this is the crux of the matter. Most people aren't ready to be co-founders.

rickdangerous1 14y ago
The only way you can get ready to do a start up is to do a startup?????
- briandear 14y ago
  No. But if you immerse yourself in the language, the business and the culture of startups, you can learn enough to give it a shot. There's more to startups that 'tech' -- basic business skills are seemingly underrated by so-called technical people. The question should never be 'can we build it', but 'can we sell it'. A startup is a business, designed to make money. Building something with no business plan can be cool and useful, but a project doesn't become a startup until the project turns into a product -- which is something that makes money.