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

Breaking a myth: Data shows you don’t actually need a co-founder

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 172 posts

Re: Breaking a myth: Data shows you don’t actually need a co-founder

#6

Post by dan_m2k »

After failure of my startup's first iteration, investigation and data made it clear my cofounder was at fault:

- deals that made a loss - poor relationship management - investing way too much in blaming the team around her

This ended up with a company seriously in the red, heading to liquidation and a completely fucked reputation.

Iteration two: flying solo, small team and 18 months in, we are in profit and I've fixed most of the relationships that needed some help.

I have a department head who I can trust and points out my blindspots but never wanted to be a founder, which is fine.

Be very careful your cofounder isn't just saying the right things in the hope of a payday.

Re: Breaking a myth: Data shows you don’t actually need a co-founder

#7

Post by T2_t2 »

smb06 wrote: post #4

The data could be biased by early exits (Series A) of several SaaS or mobile app startups. Those tend to have less need for a co-founder. Try building a scalable, enterprise IT business on your own...

That's a good point. Startups are not about exits, but big exits.

I wonder if the $$ stack up, and where the sweet spot is, given 2 founders need twice the money from an exit.

Re: Breaking a myth: Data shows you don’t actually need a co-founder

#8

Post by huhtenberg »

> Sooooo… You can start a company alone. Should you?

Only if you are young and without dependents or if you can afford to write the effort off.

Success is one metric, but another metric is the stress levels. Having been through both single- and multi-founder startups I can certainly confirm that former is incomparably more stressful than the latter. Assuming of course you are trying to build a functional company and not just play with it.

Re: Breaking a myth: Data shows you don’t actually need a co-founder

#9

Post by throwaway7312 »

I've cofounded 4 different startups. All were good ideas that bled cash or time and flopped, largely due to infighting or founder differences. One cofounder of one of the companies got really nasty about trying to leave with the rights to the company and we other two cofounders just let him have it. He sold the rights and it's now a successful venture-backed startup with soaring profits (two cofounders). Good for that team.

Since then, I've managed my own single-founder startup. We're profitable, growing, and valued at about $2.2 million. We're implementing a lot more over the course of this year and next, and I will look to exit in early 2018, once our valuation is closer to the $10 million or $20 million range.

I have a lot of other companies I want to start after. I will bring on talented people in executive roles who can complement me and make up for my own weaknesses, but I won't cofound again. I'd rather keep the smart, business-oriented people I know in masterminds where we can compare ideas and bounce thoughts off each other, than wade into business situations where our differences turn us into enemies and destroy the company.

The general wisdom on picking cofounders is pick a behind-the-scenes guy if you're a visionary, or make sure you're comfortable as the behind-the-scenes guy if you're partnering with a visionary. The problem I find (and one I've seen in a lot of cofounder groups) is that most of the people who want to start startups are visionaries.

Post reply on HN