4 ms·

Note: insisting that your co-founders have "completed an exit" is not going to make you any friends here, because you're suggesting that you're better than othe

Note: insisting that your co-founders have "completed an exit" is not going to make you any friends here, because you're suggesting that you're better than others less experienced or less fortunate who have not. Success is obviously preferable to failure, and we all believe that we're talented to a degree that gives us a high enough likelihood of success for startups to be worth pursuing. However, this sort of extreme personalization of results is not attractive.

davidw 17y ago
As someone whose closest proximity to a successful exit was a bunch of stock options in failed dot.com Linuxcare, I don't take umbrage at the requirement. They want to use that as a filter, let them. They'll miss out on some good people, but that's their choice, and as good as any in terms of screening people.
- steve___ 17y ago
  Yeah, it is difficult to know exactly how to go about it. As Jim said above we ran into the problem of too much noise when we presented the idea locally. No one wants to be excluded. On the same breath, when I started out I had many preconceived notions about the best way to run a company based on what I thought was common sense. Only by trying things and tracking the results was I able to see that the right approach wasn't always intuitive. I understand things now that I couldn't have known without the actual experience of starting the company and taking it through to the exit. I'd prefer to start the next venture with people already at that stage, if possible. All that said, we're really most interested in people who are good friends; who have worked closely together and understand each other very well.
iiijjjiii 17y ago
If you pose a general question to a startup crowd "Are you interested in joining a startup" you get everyone and their grandmother responding. The "completed an exit" requirement acts as a filter. We're hoping it will improve the signal to noise ratio.
- pwnstigator 17y ago
  "Are you interested enough in a startup to be willing to work for X months for mostly equity, knowing full well that the project has a risk of failure?" There's your filter.
  - iiijjjiii 17y ago
    Yeah, I know what you're saying. However, we often fool ourselves about what we're capable of. If someone has developed a startup and completed an exit and they're prepared to go at it again, that speaks much louder than someone who claims they are willing but has never done it.
    - pwnstigator 17y ago
      Of course. What's obnoxious about "completed an exit" is that talented people can fail to meet this for reasons that aren't their fault. Possibly the VC wanted to aim for an IPO, they failed because of the downturn, and now they haven't "completed an exit". I know of stories like this. I wouldn't bat an eye if you said you were looking for people with substantial entrepreneurial experience. I just think the specific criterion of "completed an exit" is obnoxious. It sounds like you think you're too good to talk to people who are talented but haven't had their break yet.
      - webwright 17y ago
        It's not just about talent. It's about (among other things, I assume): - Wealth (exit = cash = ability to work for equity for an indeterminate period) - Availability (recent exit = not currently engaged with another project) The first is the biggie. I'd say 99.9% of people on HN can't say "I will eschew all paying work for up to 2 years and can toss a few hundred grand of my own money in if we need a cash infusion". Of course, the recent exit thing is a problem, too. Most buyers lock in the founders for 1-2 years, so recent exiteers will have golden handcuffs.
        steve___ 17y ago
webwright 17y ago
Strongly disagree. It might be unattractive to SOME, but it's probably attractive to the people they are filtering for, who (among other things): - Are proven to be able to build a business - Probably have the cash to actually work for equity INDEFINITELY. Most people have a very finite amount of time they can work for equity before they start getting hungry and have to pick up a day job or some consulting work. - Probably don't need startup education... i.e. they know about the highs, the lows, the shifting landscapes, etc. - Aren't currently deeply engaged with another project. Personally, I'm still iffy on the "founder personal ad", whatever the filter. It's like advertising for a wife... I think it'd be better to advertise that you're interested in "dating" and seeing where it leads. But if you're going to go this route, veteran founders with a track record seems like an obvious filter.

davidw 17y ago

As someone whose closest proximity to a successful exit was a bunch of stock options in failed dot.com Linuxcare, I don't take umbrage at the requirement. They want to use that as a filter, let them. They'll miss out on some good people, but that's their choice, and as good as any in terms of screening people.

steve___ 17y ago
Yeah, it is difficult to know exactly how to go about it. As Jim said above we ran into the problem of too much noise when we presented the idea locally. No one wants to be excluded. On the same breath, when I started out I had many preconceived notions about the best way to run a company based on what I thought was common sense. Only by trying things and tracking the results was I able to see that the right approach wasn't always intuitive. I understand things now that I couldn't have known without the actual experience of starting the company and taking it through to the exit. I'd prefer to start the next venture with people already at that stage, if possible. All that said, we're really most interested in people who are good friends; who have worked closely together and understand each other very well.

iiijjjiii 17y ago

If you pose a general question to a startup crowd "Are you interested in joining a startup" you get everyone and their grandmother responding. The "completed an exit" requirement acts as a filter. We're hoping it will improve the signal to noise ratio.

pwnstigator 17y ago
"Are you interested enough in a startup to be willing to work for X months for mostly equity, knowing full well that the project has a risk of failure?" There's your filter.
- iiijjjiii 17y ago
  Yeah, I know what you're saying. However, we often fool ourselves about what we're capable of. If someone has developed a startup and completed an exit and they're prepared to go at it again, that speaks much louder than someone who claims they are willing but has never done it.
  - pwnstigator 17y ago
    Of course. What's obnoxious about "completed an exit" is that talented people can fail to meet this for reasons that aren't their fault. Possibly the VC wanted to aim for an IPO, they failed because of the downturn, and now they haven't "completed an exit". I know of stories like this. I wouldn't bat an eye if you said you were looking for people with substantial entrepreneurial experience. I just think the specific criterion of "completed an exit" is obnoxious. It sounds like you think you're too good to talk to people who are talented but haven't had their break yet.
    - webwright 17y ago
      It's not just about talent. It's about (among other things, I assume): - Wealth (exit = cash = ability to work for equity for an indeterminate period) - Availability (recent exit = not currently engaged with another project) The first is the biggie. I'd say 99.9% of people on HN can't say "I will eschew all paying work for up to 2 years and can toss a few hundred grand of my own money in if we need a cash infusion". Of course, the recent exit thing is a problem, too. Most buyers lock in the founders for 1-2 years, so recent exiteers will have golden handcuffs.
      - steve___ 17y ago

webwright 17y ago

Strongly disagree. It might be unattractive to SOME, but it's probably attractive to the people they are filtering for, who (among other things): - Are proven to be able to build a business - Probably have the cash to actually work for equity INDEFINITELY. Most people have a very finite amount of time they can work for equity before they start getting hungry and have to pick up a day job or some consulting work. - Probably don't need startup education... i.e. they know about the highs, the lows, the shifting landscapes, etc. - Aren't currently deeply engaged with another project. Personally, I'm still iffy on the "founder personal ad", whatever the filter. It's like advertising for a wife... I think it'd be better to advertise that you're interested in "dating" and seeing where it leads. But if you're going to go this route, veteran founders with a track record seems like an obvious filter.