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

Why You Don't Need A Programmer

thinkopen.ly

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 105 posts

Re: Why You Don't Need A Programmer

#41

Post by RuggeroAltair »

I think, and maybe here I'm stating the obvious, that a big problem is how people sometimes think that their idea is the real deal, while the implementation is just a matter of paying somebody.

I think that most people don't realize that most ideas aren't original, and that if you think of something, just by sociological statistics, most likely somebody else has already thought of it.

So what really matters isn't a detailed plan, but a person who builds it well.

Making a very good programmer a technical co-founder is probably the best move.

Giving away 30% of your startup, but locking in a very good technical person, is probably going to give you more success than that 30% that you wanted to keep.

Maybe somebody can point at some statistics, but I feel like that it shouldn't be difficult to have a rough idea of the success rate of technical founders' startups vs non-technical founder ones.

Re: Why You Don't Need A Programmer

#42

Post by bendingoutward »

bomatson wrote: post #31
georgemcbay wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they do actually know how to handle the business end, then they are in fact valuable, but that is assuming much. A lot of the "business-side" cofounders you run into in the real world are just glorified "idea men", willing to "generously" cut you in on 5% if you just code up their "Facebook, but for Cats" site they've been thinking about for the past year.

lol. Facebook for cats. Reminds me of Pets.com

I've actually heard a pitch in the last year that was "Facebook, but for college students."

I may have died a little inside.

Re: Why You Don't Need A Programmer

#43

Post by jules »

RuggeroAltair wrote: post #41

I think, and maybe here I'm stating the obvious, that a big problem is how people sometimes think that their idea is the real deal, while the implementation is just a matter of paying somebody. I think that most people don't realize that most ideas aren't original, and that if you think of something, just by sociological statistics, most likely somebody else has already thought of it. So what really matters isn't a d…

Looking through the list of Hi-tech companies on Wikipedia [1], almost every single company that lists founders' backgrounds have technical founders. Of course the common statistical caveats apply.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hi-tech_companies

Re: Why You Don't Need A Programmer

#44

Post by kenrikm »

dcosson wrote: post #13
ntmartin wrote: post #5

Good piece. I've talked with numerous people looking to start a startup with the assumption that implementation is just a case of hiring a few devs or outsourcing to n freelancers. I especially liked the wake up call to developers at the end. Would be very interested to read any reciprocal articles on why technical founders need a business co-founder.

Totally agree, I'd love to read a reciprocal piece. I think programmers (myself included) often feel that a non-technical person can't write a single line of code* whereas a technical person can figure out enough of the business and product side of things and make up the rest as he goes along. A lot of times this works out, but I'm sure there have been many cases where a failed startup might have succeeded if they'd…

A smart programmer can B.S. his way through business. However you can't B.S. your way though programming and still make it work. The worst possible idea I could think of is for a non technical founder to try and "hire" someone unless it is a really simple app. Implimentation > Idea

Re: Why You Don't Need A Programmer

#45

Post by adj »

I used to be of the opinion that the technical people did all the hard work and hence they should get the majority of the equity. However, once I tried to do everything myself I realised that the technical side was only one piece of the puzzle.

Business, design and marketing may not be as intellectual as programming but they are no less hard and often more important.

I really think that if two people are involved, the equity split should be 50/50 regardless of the skill set each one brings. If the equity is unbalanced, the level of effort each founder brings will be too.

Re: Why You Don't Need A Programmer

#46

Post by ajratner »

What I don't quite understand about this piece is the motivation for saying that the biggest value-add would be to 'kindly inform the person that the correct term is 'co-founder'" (I am purposely trying to keep this comment symmetrical by leaving out "technical" here...). Why would it be valuable or even 'charitable' to do this? Them calling programmers 'programmers' or vice-versa has no negative effect for the named person- IN FACT it has a large positive one as it marks those people who don't have proper respect for their counterpart co-founder role. 'Kindly informing' the transgressor of such a misphrasing is like giving them the secret password without them having earned it themselves via a proper, self-driven cultivation of proper respect for their counterpart role.

Re: Why You Don't Need A Programmer

#47

Post by delinka »

Jabbles wrote: post #22
lukeholder wrote: post #2

This puts into words very clearly my feelings and experience. I have a friend (very smart) who graduated top of class MBA. He has a 'co-founder' with him working on their idea who is also an MBA. They are looking for a coder, and offered %5-%10 stake in the company for virtually building the whole app and everything with no salary. Completely warped view of an app/online service startup. Of course they would have eve…

Is that the going rate for a job that has a high likelihood of not existing in a year's time?

I don't think I understand this question. No job you take (in the U.S.) is guaranteed to be there in a year's time. You might work for a month (being paid a month's salary) and poof the job's gone - company folded, political bullshit got you caught in the crossfire ... whatever.

You keep a fraction of your income in savings for just such an occasion. You add that month to your résumé and move on to the next job that might not last. This assumes you're not the reason you lost the job, of course.

If you know where jobs with guaranteed longevity exist, please give the rest of us some pointers.

Re: Why You Don't Need A Programmer

#48

Post by dchmiel »

I think this comes into the "You don't find a technical cofounder, you earn one." category. And trying to get a programmer to build this for you without even giving them founder recognition or founder shares is absurd. No one will work for the biz guy who wants to outsource all the work for meaningless amounts of the company. As a Biz guy, the person who holds the biggest share of our company is our technical co-founder.

Re: Why You Don't Need A Programmer

#49

Post by grepherder »

_3u10 wrote: post #11

If someone hires me to write something for them I write that for them, if they ask me for advice I give them advice. I don't get into arguments about how their idea won't work, or call them 'stupid', I charge them my rate for the work they ask me to do and I thank them when they pay me. You think the guys at the general store in 1849 told the gold prospectors that they were stupid and would lose their money? Or do yo…

Ditto, I too think this discussion is a bit tired. It's a free market, if someone agrees to do something for a certain pay, let them. Obviously, in most cases, you are going to get more commitment and possibly even higher quality work from said person as a co-founder. It all depends on what you need. There are thousands of examples of successful projects with hired work (I can speak for the European market), just not so many on the web, but I would guess the lack of success in that area correlates with other factors.

Re: Why You Don't Need A Programmer

#50

Post by delinka »

oliverhunt wrote: post #24

Are programmers really willing to put together a site for someone else while the other person has a view to make money from the idea, even if the programmer is payed at the going rate? what is the going rate?

This sounds like you're asking if an employee is willing to work for an employer who makes a profit off the employee's labor. And that, my friend, is exactly how business works.
Post reply on HN