Yes You Need a Co-Founder

Yes You Need a Co-Founder(giffconstable.com)

35 points by giffc 15 years ago | 18 comments

pvg 15 years ago |

These become a lot more fun to read (after the 5th one or so) by replacing the debated term with something else. Let's say, 'pants', for instance -

Yes, You Need Pants

Don’t think about pants in terms of equity.

[...]the ideal number of pants is two or three.

I feel incredibly lucky to have my brilliant pants[...]

Revel in the intensity of your pants team.

Oh and if the author happens to be reading, it's 'for all intents and purposes' rather than 'intensive purposes'.

dasil003 15 years ago | |

All the more so if you are in the UK

sthomps 15 years ago |

oh my god, give me a break. Everyone has their own opinion on what works for them. Single, co, tri, quad, what does it matter? Sure if you have the perfect people working together in unison then it will be easier. It comes down to YOU, as you allude to. And just because you can't do it alone doesn't mean that you have to lump everyone in together.

This is like the NYC vs SF debate, we are like schoolchildren. "My way is better". Now it's the single vs co-founder debate. Statistically, two people starting a company are usually better than one. But remember that every situation is unique, and what works for people works for people. That's the reason that we have so many different types of companies.

fmora 15 years ago | |

Finding a co-founder is probably harder than finding a life time soul-mate. Unless the union between you and your co-founder feels 100% natural don't even try it. I say that it is better to be alone than to be in bad company. In this case you might as well start the journey alone, if you happen to find a great co-founder along the way great, if not, continue the journey alone. To advise somebody to not start a company until you find a co-founder is bad advise. Good if you have one, not terribly bad if you don't.

giffc 15 years ago | | |

Well I disagree that it is harder than finding a soul-mate, but I do agree it is tricky, and I do agree that you shouldn't partner up with someone you are not feeling great about. I actually wrote that you shouldn't wait to start your business, so we're in agreement fmora, but there are good reasons why you should continue to seek a complementary partner and not be overly stingy in order to bring them on board. Obviously have vesting schedules and protect yourself in case it doesn't work out.

giffc 15 years ago | |

Your critique is totally fair. I agree that every situation is unique -- tried to say that in conclusion -- but I did want to take a strong stand especially for newer entrepreneurs trying to figure out their path. I've seen these pieces saying you don't need a co-founder, and haven't seen much recently saying, "wait a minute, hold up there."

I also tried to clarify twice that I'm talking about companies with a strong software component, where team is so essential. At the end of the day, everyone has to carve their own path, no arguments, but there are general points that can increase the odds in your favor and that's merely the warning I tried to give.

sthomps 15 years ago | | |

You are exactly right Giff. I didn't mean to sound like I was criticizing your post in general, it's just the whole discussion in general. I just finishing reading 3 posts this week on NY vs SF and then solo vs co. So this happened to be the post that I commented on :D.

I believe that if you happen to find a co-founder that truly works well with you, amazing things can happen. That is definitely the highest percentage way to go. I am a newer entrepreneur so I get what you are saying. But with very little connections and no real experience, it is much better to start as a solo guy (like you mentioned) and then hopefully find someone along the way.

Although, I still see no reason why those people can't be employees. It all depends on the type of leader that you are. Regardless, good post (and I love your list of lawyers, that's how I found mine, so I appreciate it).

Shorel 15 years ago | | |

Your strong stand made me feel better about going solo.

I mean, almost everybody agreed about 'you need a co-founder' until last week, and I was convinced about it. Your reactionary post made it look like the argument had weakness and needed to be defended.

I think that in my case, it's just a matter of 'it should happen in a natural way': let's work, if I need a co-founder, it should appear on the way, if I don't, it will not appear.

dublinclontarf 15 years ago |

I like that he links to how to choose a co-founder down the bottom, but what I want to know, how the hell do you find one in the first place?

If your in SF or any other startup hub then thats fine, but what if your in a proverbial co-founder desert?

Now my situation will be somewhat unique, being in China and all(not even a big city, some backwater, the main industry here is agriculture, this is China's rice basket) but I really wouldn't know where to start and many others would be the same.

niico 15 years ago |

This is that I think.

Sometimes finding a "co-founder" could take more time than developing the whole project. Time, that btw, you don't have. Time = Money. Money that you don't have either.

So...

If I ask you "Name a friend that you would love to work with and believe he is up to the entrepreneurial challenge of this project" and you take more than 10 seconds to figure out who might be suitable for the challenge, you simply don't have one.

I believe co-founders, partners (however you wanna call them) is more of an attitude thing than a skill thing. Startups require a lot of balls to jump in, even more if you have a full time job and you need to quit it to get this project on track.

Searching for the right partner could be just like waiting for the bus. I could just stay at the bus stop or start walking (coding) to the next stop and then maybe wait there. You could even get to meet your new biz partner half way the road.

It's a good head-breaker paradox. Wait till I find someone to work with or simply start doing it by yourself.

Partners don't always have to actually START the startup with you. They could jump in at any time and it could be extremely handy. Having an extra pair of eyes and hands is always good (you will have to learn to filter critics that you didn't have before and convert them into feedback)

donaq 15 years ago |

You cannot do this alone — it is way too hard, both work-wise and emotionally.

Who's "You"? Does he know every person planning to be a single founder that well?

jscore 15 years ago | |

I also disagree with a lot of what he says, but then I realized it's his personal blog.

I know plenty of people running small companies by themselves.

chc 15 years ago | | |

The fact that it's his personal blog doesn't make his opinions on what I can do any more or less valid.

thinkcomp 15 years ago |

Generally, articles that make complex issues seem black and white are silly.

zemanel 15 years ago |

i've given up on finding co-founders ....

niico 15 years ago | |

then stop looking for one and start building, eventually you will get to meet people that would be interested in your work.

This could be actually better in terms of equity. Since you already started the work you could ask for 50+% ;)

zemanel 15 years ago | | |

that's the spirit lad, wish i had 10 man like you

startuprules 15 years ago |

...Because you're weak

Because you can't stand the pain.

Because you would like to end up with 10% of the company after working 14 hour days.

Because you need someone to complain to after every setback.

Because you don't have the money or patience.

Because you don't know how to hire the right employees.

Because you're not an entrepreneur.