Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: How common is this view within software startup community?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 14 posts

Ask HN: How common is this view within software startup community?

#1

Post by throwaway564738 »

A year ago I had an opportunity to visit a software startup incubator. The views within most of the aspiring founders in that incubator was that they do not require software engineers/professionals as a founding team member. The software can be developed using "interns or cheap Indians" and that way the founding teams do not have to share equity.

I heard the same argument recently by some other aspiring founders.

So just out of curiosity, how common is this view within the software startup community?

Re: Ask HN: How common is this view within software startup community?

#2

Post by Ozzie_osman »

Not sure where the incubator you visited was, but I'd say mainstream view in Silicon Valley is that most teams need a technical cofounder (unless the startup just isn't technical at all). If anything, it's sometimes the other extreme: people will claim that technical cofounders don't need business cofounders.

That said, since it is so difficult to find technical cofounders, some teams end up outsourcing technical work out of necessity (not because they don't want to share equity).

Re: Ask HN: How common is this view within software startup community?

#3

Post by oblib »

That was pretty much the impression I got when going through Startup School here last autumn.

The focus was on beating the bushes to see if you could generate interest (finding "Market Fit") and using an "MVP" (minimum viable product) that didn't even have to be a working product, to basically provide an image (illustrations, videos, etc) of what it will do.

If you can generate interest then you start building a product. Pretty much the opposite of "If you build it they will come".

So, in that scenario, getting a software engineer is often akin to going to the hardware store and buying a hammer.

Re: Ask HN: How common is this view within software startup community?

#5

Post by s_erik »

razorbladeknife wrote: post #4

Very common specially now, many companies have popped up which charge competitive rates for development. Keep in mind, most startups are simply CRUD apps where you don't need much technology.

If the startups are just CRUD apps then are those defensible businesses? As per my understanding most successful software businesses have something in their tech stack that cannot be easily replicated.

Re: Ask HN: How common is this view within software startup community?

#6

Post by remyp »

s_erik wrote: post #5
razorbladeknife wrote: post #4

Very common specially now, many companies have popped up which charge competitive rates for development. Keep in mind, most startups are simply CRUD apps where you don't need much technology.

If the startups are just CRUD apps then are those defensible businesses? As per my understanding most successful software businesses have something in their tech stack that cannot be easily replicated.

Technology is not the only “moat” there is. A photo sharing app is ultimately CRUD but it’s pretty hard to take down Instagram.

Re: Ask HN: How common is this view within software startup community?

#7

Post by razorbladeknife »

s_erik wrote: post #5
razorbladeknife wrote: post #4

Very common specially now, many companies have popped up which charge competitive rates for development. Keep in mind, most startups are simply CRUD apps where you don't need much technology.

If the startups are just CRUD apps then are those defensible businesses? As per my understanding most successful software businesses have something in their tech stack that cannot be easily replicated.

It's not true.

Think of Dropbox or Instagram or even Amazon

What's there which technologically can't be replicated given enough money?

It's the userbase/network effect which can't be reflected if given

Re: Ask HN: How common is this view within software startup community?

#8

Post by _448 »

razorbladeknife wrote: post #7
s_erik wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the startups are just CRUD apps then are those defensible businesses? As per my understanding most successful software businesses have something in their tech stack that cannot be easily replicated.

It's not true. Think of Dropbox or Instagram or even Amazon What's there which technologically can't be replicated given enough money? It's the userbase/network effect which can't be reflected if given

But they all had technical founders/co-founders? Thats what I think OP's question was related to?

Re: Ask HN: How common is this view within software startup community?

#10

Post by ishjoh »

oblib wrote: post #3

That was pretty much the impression I got when going through Startup School here last autumn. The focus was on beating the bushes to see if you could generate interest (finding "Market Fit") and using an "MVP" (minimum viable product) that didn't even have to be a working product, to basically provide an image (illustrations, videos, etc) of what it will do. If you can generate interest then you start building a prod…

in your experience at startup school, who created the illustrations and videos, the founders themselves or did they get a designer involved?
Post reply on HN