Starting up with a friend • Hacker News Board

Re: Starting up with a friend

#51

Post by sho » Thu, Mar 12, 2009, 9:06 AM UTC

smanek wrote: post #50

sho wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard something similar, but with a slight twist - when any decision is to be made, make sure you have a prime number of deciders, otherwise there is the possibility of deadlock. I think that's from the founder of Sony? He had a lot of cool ideas like that. Not too many companies have 9 founders, though, so I guess your version works well enough for startups.

That's stupid. Two is prime - which does allow for deadlock. And for odd primes, why are they better than just odds?

Because a group of 9, say, can deadlock into 3 groups of 3.

Sorry, I think I was supposed to exclude 2.

Re: Starting up with a friend

#52

Post by smanek » Thu, Mar 12, 2009, 9:54 AM UTC

sho wrote: post #51

smanek wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's stupid. Two is prime - which does allow for deadlock. And for odd primes, why are they better than just odds?

Because a group of 9, say, can deadlock into 3 groups of 3. Sorry, I think I was supposed to exclude 2.

Fair enough. But, in my experience, most issues that cause deadlock reduce to binary decisions - in which case having an odd number of deciders is sufficient.

If you have to account for n-ary decisions, then you can never be to guaranteed to be free from deadlock no matter how many deciders you have (trivially, consider the case where n equals the number of deciders).

Re: Starting up with a friend

#53

Post by AlexTheFounder » Thu, Mar 12, 2009, 10:15 AM UTC

scotth wrote: post #48

AlexTheFounder wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're married for 12 years, have 2 kids and overall we're quite happy. Just because my wife is always right about the house and kids, does not imply anything how deep our relations are. In fact I have more time to hack things because I can leave a lot to my wife. That's how successful companies get built

On the other hand, things may be better with your contribution, even if she doesn't agree. Playing second fiddle in order to keep peace is just laying down, not being productive.

I do not 'keep peace', we both understand that it is the most productive approach. And yes I do have my voice when needed.

Re: Starting up with a friend

#54

Post by nav » Thu, Mar 12, 2009, 1:59 PM UTC

Though the common sentiment here is not to start a company with a friend; I respect the general opinions in the article and comment threads, thought I must add that 'trust' is key. Typically those you trust are friends or family; unf. a Catch 22. I've started a few companies with friends and have learned a few things along the way. They are as follows:

1). Legitimize the business. Get the paper work done and a lawyer and advisor on board. The ability to have an unaffiliated third party arbitrator it key.

2). Definition of mutual goals. Know why all parties involved are even considering being a part of the venture, make it transparent and relate possible exits to that.

3). Define roles and respect them. If you co-founder is a designer trust his judgement; likely-hood is that he/she will do the same.

4). Define bailout plans. I you or your co-founder decides to bail; have a plan and make sure everyone involved knows of the plan. Hopefully the team 'trusts' each other to execute it incase they decided to seek greener pastures.

@lionhearted has some great points as well. Great thread and article.

Re: Starting up with a friend

#55

Post by Hexstream » Thu, Mar 12, 2009, 4:43 PM UTC

lionhearted wrote: post #9

swombat wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks! I've added some of those questions into the list in the article (with link to the comment, but can link elsewhere if you want)

Ah, I didn't realize that was your site mate. You're one of my favorite submitters on here - it seems like I'm reading something insightful from you almost every day on here. Glad I was able to contribute a bit, and thanks again for being awesome.

Maybe it could be useful to have a checkbox to specify when we're submitting our own content?

Re: Starting up with a friend

#56

Post by zandorg » Thu, Mar 12, 2009, 5:55 PM UTC

I have a friend who works for a bank, and I needed some help with a complex SQL query. Instead of paying in stock, I just said "Here's so-and-so per hour" and it took 2 hours, and I paid him, then did the same a couple of weeks later.

Another guy did me an Installshield script on Elance.

I paid a lawyer for a non-disclosure agreement.

The lesson for me is, paying in stock is just like an urban legend, and actually, if you've got the lion's share of development done yourself, the edge cases can be got rid of cheaply for little more than the rent.

Also, if you haven't got friends who want to partner in a company, don't let it stop you developing a product.

Re: Starting up with a friend

#57

Post by zafarali » Fri, Mar 13, 2009, 1:47 PM UTC

This is interesting. Great article. I've seen many start ups fail with the help of friends. I've seen few succeed with friends. I've seen wayyy too many fails with only one person working in the start up. So be safe. Go get a friend

Re: Starting up with a friend

#58

Post by dingobingo » Fri, Mar 13, 2009, 2:14 PM UTC

zafarali wrote: post #57

This is interesting. Great article. I've seen many start ups fail with the help of friends. I've seen few succeed with friends. I've seen wayyy too many fails with only one person working in the start up. So be safe. Go get a friend

wow. thanks for the info :)

Re: Starting up with a friend

#59

Post by redrobot5050 » Fri, Mar 20, 2009, 7:25 AM UTC

chiffonade wrote: post #45

redrobot5050 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only about 50% of marriages fail in 10 years. On the other hand, only about 45% of businesses make it past 5 years. I would argue that his strategy couldn't be any worse for beating the odds than anyone else's, contrary to what you might believe.

> I would argue that his strategy couldn't be any worse for beating the odds than anyone else's You're trying to have a better strategy, not one that "isn't any worse". Sigh.

Touche. But my point that all strategies are equally likely to succeed, or better phrased, better to fail still stands. Or maybe, as you've indicated, its simply more people are less prepared.

Re: Starting up with a friend

#60

Post by redrobot5050 » Fri, Mar 20, 2009, 7:27 AM UTC

scotth wrote: post #46

redrobot5050 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, you're way off on that. The swoosh is Nike. When people were mugging each other for Air Jordans, think back: each commercial ended with a silhouette of Jordan about to dunk, and below him, the Nike Swoosh. Show anyone the swoosh and they either associate it with "Just Do It" (again, Nike's trademark) or Nike itself. You might as well claim that Apple's startup chime is just another beep.

Mike made the swoosh, not the other way around.

No, Nike made the swoosh. MJ was also just $45 million of marketing spent wisely. But the swoosh remains. It was a brilliant strategy. Tie the two together, but after so many years, when the athlete retires, you still have the swoosh.