11–19 of 19 posts
Also reminds me of Virgance.
The other problem with this proposal is that the Internet is extremely competitive. You can't do anything great part-time over the long term. A funded team working full-time has a huge advantage on you.
Of course, giving up control sucks. "Valuation is temporary, control is forever." And a business controlled by VCs too early can't innovate easily. So, either raise money from angels, or learn how to negotiate with Venture capitalists. Check out Nivi and my writings (sorry, shameless plug) at http://www.venturehacks.com.
If you do have a good product with traction and are out raising VC money, ping me and I'd be happy to help you keep control (free!)
midVentures are a bunch of University of Chicago and Northwestern alums who have joined together to do almost exactly what you describe: http://midventures.com/
Interesting, I was not familiar with them. I read the web site and it doesn't really highlight if/how they bring in other entrepreneurs. I will have to get in touch with them, or perhaps check out their next event. Thanks for the link!
This sounds like you've read the 4 hour work week and then went to an MLM recruitment meeting.=D This not meant to be derogatory in any way, I do feel that you've put much thought into this. That is just my impression of the concept. I think in theory, this is great. However it seems to me like rather than one person starting one business, you have "a team" starting multiple businesses on top of managing their partne…
I don't really follow your first two sentences. I am interested in starting a company that I remain in control of, or at least share ownership with the other people doing the work, rather than having random people with money telling me what to do. I am not familiar with MLM, but the 4 hour workweek struck me as finding a way to do as little as possible so you could become a globetrotting rich kid. As to your final po…
The MLM is in reference to: founders convince other consultants to contribute their bench time.
Obviously I know you are not trying to run a mult-level-marketing outfit, but I feel the implementation is similar.
I think your plan trivializes a lot of things. Mainly:
- Outsource yourself from your day job
- Start a startup
- Teaming up with like-minded people as motivated as you.
- Sharing profits "simply".
These are not trivial.
Also your main point is that you don't want you business to be dictated by outside investors. But why is the assumption that anyone investing money would be a detriment while anyone investing domain-knowledge and side-profits is an asset? (as per your consultancy network).
I don't see how giving equity to people more like you is any better or worse than giving equity to outside investors. Equity is equity and if your main concern is not giving up control of your business, you should not be dealing in any equity whatsoever.
To me, you are trying to solve a purely business problem, but you are trying to do it in a way that involves the product development/tech side. Though, I have no idea if that is good or bad.
I am on board with exactly what you are saying. I want my own business to be my business. But this is why I'm a DHH disciple. Sure its not 1,2,3 easy, but the 37 signals way is COMMON SENSE, when it comes to business. So it sounds like your goals are more business then they are tech; in that case, start with the business side of things, and see how that fits into your tech ideas, not the other way around.
(just subjective advice - honestly meant as constructive criticism: best of luck)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't really follow your first two sentences. I am interested in starting a company that I remain in control of, or at least share ownership with the other people doing the work, rather than having random people with money telling me what to do. I am not familiar with MLM, but the 4 hour workweek struck me as finding a way to do as little as possible so you could become a globetrotting rich kid. As to your final po…
The 4hww reference is in regards to your plan outsourcing yourself from your day job . As well as the 50/50 split of working on your own time, and developing a business. The MLM is in reference to: founders convince other consultants to contribute their bench time . Obviously I know you are not trying to run a mult-level-marketing outfit, but I feel the implementation is similar. I think your plan trivializes a lot o…
To be clear, I don't really have a problem with the VC approach. I just see most of the success stories in that realm as people who become fantastically rich but lose control of their companies along the way. I am hoping to build something that is long term, sustainable and leaves me in control of the thing I created. I was not trying to imply that I prefer one type of person to have equity over another, rather I hoped to share equity among the people who contributed. The argument against VC money was wholly separate from the argument for paying contributors with equity. The latter is because cash will be tight and because I believe it is better to give people a stake in their future rather than just a paycheck and a task list.
Finally, the idea that I am solving a business problem over a technical one here is right on. I haven't really mentioned a startup idea. Previously, I spent a year trying to get a company off the ground by myself (and failed miserably). I learned that, for me, it would be better to work with others towards this goal while leveraging their experience, talent and outside perspectives. VCs can provide this as well, but at what price? This is simply meant to be another path towards the goal of a startup, with different sacrifices along the way.
I originally started my angel fund as an incubator (The Hit Forge). I quickly moved away because of Adverse Selection - the best entrepreneurs are insanely committed to themselves and their ideas, and rationally or irrationally, don't want to diversify. Since then, I've invested in a lot of companies, including Twitter and Disqus and Heyzap, and am glad that I did so. The Incubator model works as a "search" model (MR…
They (37s, fogcreek, etc.) did start as consulting businesses and raised little or no outside capital to build immensely profitable products...
I originally started my angel fund as an incubator (The Hit Forge). I quickly moved away because of Adverse Selection - the best entrepreneurs are insanely committed to themselves and their ideas, and rationally or irrationally, don't want to diversify. Since then, I've invested in a lot of companies, including Twitter and Disqus and Heyzap, and am glad that I did so. The Incubator model works as a "search" model (MR…
So how do ramen profitable companies and "Italian restaurants on the web" (ie. Small self-funded companies that fit a hugely profitable niche) fit your world view? They (37s, fogcreek, etc.) did start as consulting businesses and raised little or no outside capital to build immensely profitable products...