Cofounders Are a Dumb Requirement
arisx.com
Cofounders Are a Dumb Requirement
1–10 of 22 posts
Re: Cofounders Are a Dumb Requirement
#2Why is it so hard to find the right cofounder? Maybe solo founders are underrated. I'm starting an experiment to find out.
Re: Cofounders Are a Dumb Requirement
#3> It’s particularly dangerous if a smart person gave you the requirements because you might not question them enough. Everyone’s wrong. No matter who you are, everyone’s wrong some of the time.
The source of this quote can be polarizing, but it's quite true unless you're in some really rarified circle.
Re: Cofounders Are a Dumb Requirement
#4Investors like cofounders because they don’t like betting on people who either think they can do everything or can’t work with others. Why? Because starting and running a business is really, really hard—-there are many things to do all at the same time—-and the software or other technology is only a small part of job. Solo founders are just not very likely to succeed. There is too much risk.
Oh, and “finding” a cofounder is not something one does by searching on the Internet. It’s a result of being a team player over the years and developing strong working relationships. (Oops, there’s that team player thing again…)
Re: Cofounders Are a Dumb Requirement
#5Investors like cofounders because they don’t like betting on people who either think they can do everything or can’t work with others. Why? Because starting and running a business is really, really hard—-there are many things to do all at the same time—-and the software or other technology is only a small part of job. Solo founders are just not very likely to succeed. There is too much risk. Oh, and “finding” a cofou…
> Oh, and “finding” a cofounder is not something one does by searching on the Internet.
Why not? I've had serious offers to co-found companies from random seatmates on bus rides between Silicon Valley and Los Angeles.
Frankly, the biggest obstacle I've had is not in finding team-players (with all due respect to everyone reading this, team-players are a dime a dozen; how could any company function if the majority of people in our society weren't team players?).
For me the biggest obstacle (by far), has been, finding people with drive. I mean, think about all the people who struggle to do remote work, how are they going to find the drive to produce when they don't even have a boss anymore?
Re: Cofounders Are a Dumb Requirement
#6Investors like cofounders because they don’t like betting on people who either think they can do everything or can’t work with others. Why? Because starting and running a business is really, really hard—-there are many things to do all at the same time—-and the software or other technology is only a small part of job. Solo founders are just not very likely to succeed. There is too much risk. Oh, and “finding” a cofou…
The second paragraph is so out of touch. You can do everything right, be a “team player” and never find someone willing to work for free, grind after work and start a startup.
Re: Cofounders Are a Dumb Requirement
#7Cofounders are a waste of time unless it’s someone who is more skilled than the solo founder - in which case the prospect would be better off on their own. Any skill can be hired in the marketplace, so any skills the solo founder doesn’t have can be farmed out to others. And if the founder doesnt have the funding or skills to get the concept to the point where they are hiring others, they need a better roadmap.
Re: Cofounders Are a Dumb Requirement
#8Investors like cofounders because they don’t like betting on people who either think they can do everything or can’t work with others. Why? Because starting and running a business is really, really hard—-there are many things to do all at the same time—-and the software or other technology is only a small part of job. Solo founders are just not very likely to succeed. There is too much risk. Oh, and “finding” a cofou…
The second paragraph is so out of touch. You can do everything right, be a “team player” and never find someone willing to work for free, grind after work and start a startup.
Perhaps put another way - as a company grows a good founder needs to be able to locate skilled individuals with an appetite for risk, that are willing to bet on a vision and that founder's ability to execute that vision, and importantly can align with the founder on that vision. VCs help with this later in the growth cycle but the requirement is still there.
Having a good cofounder signals you can align your vision with a similarly high performer and convince them you can execute
Re: Cofounders Are a Dumb Requirement
#9Maybe I missed something. Because I see it simple: Life happens - one founder can die/disappear suddenly and then what? This is why you should have more than one backup drive, more than one device with your crypto-keys, more than one email account, ...
(And this is without being a team player or not)
Re: Cofounders Are a Dumb Requirement
#10> Don was a brass tacks semiconductor sales guy who founded Sequoia Capital in 1972 with the novel idea of investing in markets, not founders. He could care less about the number of founders in a startup. Half the time, he’d replace them.
Thought this was a weird characterization. If he’s willing to go so far to put specific people in charge of companies, seems like the leaders of the business are very important to him indeed.