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

The Case for the Single Founder Startup

readwriteweb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–18 of 18 posts

Re: The Case for the Single Founder Startup

#11

Post by alexkearns »

patio11 wrote: post #9
tribeofone wrote: post #7

The being nimble and touchy relationship stuff is nice, but the real reason you dont need a cofounder is: why split the equity 50/50, 75/25 or whatever it is? You used to need partners to share risk (mainly the infusion of capital). In this industry there are very small barriers to entry, faster returns, and plenty of money available if you have a good idea. Meaning there is very little risk on the part of a entrepre…

Meaning there is very little risk on the part of a entrepreneur. This line, more than anything else in the last year, is pinging my bubble radar. Ping, ping, ping ! It isn't skydiving without a parachute, but essentially everybody capable of doing a fundable business is also capable of getting a six figure job tomorrow in the current economic environment. If it takes 1.5 to 3 years of your life to discover that the b…

You have probably learnt a lot however. Also, you assume that if someone was not working on their start-up, they would be doing that high paid tech job you refer to. But the reason that many people do a start up is that they could not stand to do that high paid tech job in the first place.

Re: The Case for the Single Founder Startup

#12

Post by troels »

alexkearns wrote: post #11
patio11 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meaning there is very little risk on the part of a entrepreneur. This line, more than anything else in the last year, is pinging my bubble radar. Ping, ping, ping ! It isn't skydiving without a parachute, but essentially everybody capable of doing a fundable business is also capable of getting a six figure job tomorrow in the current economic environment. If it takes 1.5 to 3 years of your life to discover that the b…

You have probably learnt a lot however. Also, you assume that if someone was not working on their start-up, they would be doing that high paid tech job you refer to. But the reason that many people do a start up is that they could not stand to do that high paid tech job in the first place.

You have probably learnt a lot however.

Well, that is inevitable, regardless of what you do.

Re: The Case for the Single Founder Startup

#13

Post by ttalola »

phyllotaxis wrote: post #2

This should be read by anyone with the drive to make their own future. I believe passionately in building strong relationships with as many people you can- but having someone that truly shares your type of drive is rare. I think this article should be as useful to all you current co-founders, too, as a reminder of the elements to work toward in a genuinely symbiotic partnership. Excellent advice.

Having a co-founder is better than going alone, but only if the person shares same values, passion, attitude to work etc. Instead of trying find this person (which is more difficult and takes more time outside the Valley) it's better start working on the idea by yourself while still keeping your eyes open for co-founder/1st employee.

Re: The Case for the Single Founder Startup

#14

Post by chc »

patio11 wrote: post #9
tribeofone wrote: post #7

The being nimble and touchy relationship stuff is nice, but the real reason you dont need a cofounder is: why split the equity 50/50, 75/25 or whatever it is? You used to need partners to share risk (mainly the infusion of capital). In this industry there are very small barriers to entry, faster returns, and plenty of money available if you have a good idea. Meaning there is very little risk on the part of a entrepre…

Meaning there is very little risk on the part of a entrepreneur. This line, more than anything else in the last year, is pinging my bubble radar. Ping, ping, ping ! It isn't skydiving without a parachute, but essentially everybody capable of doing a fundable business is also capable of getting a six figure job tomorrow in the current economic environment. If it takes 1.5 to 3 years of your life to discover that the b…

That's a way to look at things that has some value from a decision-making perspective, but it's not the only way. When people talk about there being little risk to opening a business nowadays, they mean there is little risk of an outcome more catastrophic than a little wasted time — the outcome might not necessarily be rosy, but you can keep going and hardly miss a beat. If you forgo that six-figure paycheck for a business that goes belly-up, good news: You're still the kind of person who can get a six-figure job tomorrow.

Re: The Case for the Single Founder Startup

#18

Post by smarterchild »

Troll_Whisperer wrote: post #17
rocktronica wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cost !== Lost Potential

What does it mean when a ! is followed by a double equals? Is !== different from != in netspeak?

Strict equals - it doesn't cast types.

Programming distinction, and no idea why the author used that. Mostly the same meaning though, for conversational purposes.

Post reply on HN