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

You do need a technical co-founder [video]

ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 381 posts

Re: You do need a technical co-founder [video]

#331

Post by jacquesm »

TurkishPoptart wrote: post #81
sebmellen wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More people need to read https://grugbrain.dev/

I like this but I don't understand one part under "Saying OK" * sometimes probably best just not tell project manager and do it 80/20 way.* Does 80/20 in this context mean that we'll implement 80% of what is asked for an leave out the remaining complex parts?

You do 80% of the functionality with 20% of the required code and pretend that this is what the project manager asked for. Likely they'll never notice the missing bits which may have seemed like a good idea at the time .If they insist you do 80% of what remains with another 20% of the code.

But with some luck your project managers' butterfly mind will have flitted on to greener pastures and everybody is happy. No need for Grug to reach for his club (while remaining calm).

Re: You do need a technical co-founder [video]

#332

Post by akaljotc »

csa wrote: post #301
ericjmorey wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is an agency in this context?

> What is an agency in this context? Successful tech agencies that have been started by people I know: - programming - digital marketing - social media - web development - SEO - data science - AI (this is emerging) The agency is a business that goes to other businesses and offers to solve one or more of their business problems for a fee. Sometimes these fees are one-time payments, sometimes they are recurring, someti…

question(s):

would you consider a small saas product in this realm? that is, is there a clear distinction for what could be considered an agency vs a saas product? or is the line blurred in some contexts?

Re: You do need a technical co-founder [video]

#333

Post by gedy »

esafak wrote: post #273
gedy wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Real" agile is meant to do just this, but it's rare without falling into cargo culting.

So let others add ideas to the backlog and the product owners triage? I would be worried about ideas getting drowned, leading to a disincentive in participation. I would probably add a layer of voting or something to allow good ideas to surface.

I meant that product still writes the high level user stories, but eng figures out the solution along side UX, product, etc. Not handed broken down tasks and mockups first.

Re: You do need a technical co-founder [video]

#334

Post by csa »

waprin wrote: post #239
puniaviision wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This whole comment was beautiful. Especially this part: "But to recap, my high level point is that the technical expertise is not really the money printer. The money printer is mapping market demand to technical products, which is a business skill. And that business skill is worth a lot more than technical skills. Its just a type of business skill that you find more often in developers than you do in MBA, and so we d…

Thanks! I'm in a similar boat. I'm not lecturing anyone having learned from success but having learned from failure. I just spent an entire year spent building software products and they almost all failed. I wrote a long retro (too long, not edited, more for myself than for others, but if curious: https://www.billprin.com/notes/one-year-retro ) and the #1 cause of failure I wrote down was not doing enough talking to…

> I'm thinking the much bigger value of audience building is that it's easier to get people to tell you what to build in the first place.

Yes!

It’s basically inbound sales for business ideas.

Re: You do need a technical co-founder [video]

#335

Post by gnicholas »

j45 wrote: post #293
opportune wrote: post #129

Even this article IMO subtly demonstrates the mindset that leads nontechnical founders to not think they need a technical cofounder, by phrasing the search for one as “recruiting” as if they were a subordinate or code monkey. It should be a partner relationship, not a subordinate relationship. This mindset that technical cofounders are essentially “coders” (a term I hate) is very prevalent among inexperienced nontech…

Over the years, when I meet a non-technical founder looking for a technical founder, I ask them if they're ok owning as little of the startup that they offer to the technical person, until they can deliver sales. Technical people, in large do deliver a product and something that works. It might not be what the market wants, or the right thing, but speed of iteration, is again technical, and something the technical fo…

This is an interesting idea — variable vesting based on milestones. It would be a great way to reduce risk, though of course there are issues that could arise that would make this complicated. For example, if the technical person vests based on hitting certain product-related goals, does he get penalized if part of the dev team gets hired by another company, which makes it harder for him to hit the milestones? Or for the non-technical cofounder, if the economy goes into a tailspin, and it's much harder to make sales than the cofounders anticipated, should he not vest, even if he's doing everything he can?

But overall, I think this is a really intriguing idea. Points could be assigned for what each founder is bringing to the table (concrete idea, market research, cash), and they would get some vested stock for that. Then the rest of the founder's shares could be put into a pool and vested to particular founders that hit their milestones. You wouldn't want to make it too adversarial, but it's possible the benefits of incentive alignment would overcome the downsides of the zero-sum game thinking that the system could engender.

Re: You do need a technical co-founder [video]

#336

Post by smearth »

opportune wrote: post #129

Even this article IMO subtly demonstrates the mindset that leads nontechnical founders to not think they need a technical cofounder, by phrasing the search for one as “recruiting” as if they were a subordinate or code monkey. It should be a partner relationship, not a subordinate relationship. This mindset that technical cofounders are essentially “coders” (a term I hate) is very prevalent among inexperienced nontech…

May I ask what a non-technical founder should look for in a technical co-founder?

I have two customers for slightly different businesses. The deals are made, I am building MVP's myself and JVing with established tech companies to get products to market.

I have a supply chain with a 30% cost advantage with customers.

and

I have a hardware software system that significantly improves hire businesses that has customers and development partnerships with research organisations and funding applications in progress.

Both have customers and large B2B growth potential.

I am building the MVP's myself while selling and JVing as necessary but would happily partner equally with a technical expert in Microsoft365 and PostgreSQL and PostGIS.

I'm an expert in business design and love technology without being talented or experienced building it. Someone with a business mind and opinions plus the technical skills to build an MVP and hire a technology team would be perfect. I can license my way to market but it will a clunkier more painful start. If I could work with someone who has deep experience with making microsoft365 work smoothly, for small volumes of data and a small number of users initially, then they would add value to both businesses instantly.

My question is should I grind through this myself with JV's where needed using architects on contract for the tricky bits and build the technical knowledge to be a really good technical work partner enabling recruitment of a better technical co-founder or should I recruit the best technical-cofounder I can and get on with growing the businesses.

I would happily take a smaller salary from cashflow than a technical co-founder initially, recognising their market value remuneration as soon as the business is able - likely early year 2. I would even consider technical guidance/mentoring for some equity if someone was interested.

And I know you are supposed to focus on one thing at a time but the software for the two business systems is similar, and I have systems and people to drive the sales and management for both so will offering a technical-co founder 2 bites at 2 potential rapid growth businesses make them think they were increasing or reducing their odds of success?

What questions would I ask to make sure the partnership will be enjoyable for the technical co-founder?

Are there any books/experts on keeping technical co-founders happy?

Re: You do need a technical co-founder [video]

#337

Post by exabrial »

Lol why are tech skills so talked down on?

How about a non idiot business and accounting savvy co founder with a great vision and a solid product idea with a firm understanding why previous attempts failed, but also with the maturity to admit when they were wrong about their calls? Loool

Come on man.

Re: You do need a technical co-founder [video]

#338

Post by chefandy »

tptacek wrote: post #25
chefandy wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who's rarely been "just a programmer" or "just a designer," that hasn't stopped me from being viewed as such by managers if it's convenient for them to mentally classify me as such.

Your cofounder in a new startup isn't your manager.

The point is you can act like whatever you want, and so can everybody else, and often that means they'll be idiots, often in consequential ways. That's life.

Re: You do need a technical co-founder [video]

#339

Post by benreesman »

opportune wrote: post #129

Even this article IMO subtly demonstrates the mindset that leads nontechnical founders to not think they need a technical cofounder, by phrasing the search for one as “recruiting” as if they were a subordinate or code monkey. It should be a partner relationship, not a subordinate relationship. This mindset that technical cofounders are essentially “coders” (a term I hate) is very prevalent among inexperienced nontech…

It would be nice(-er) if people said: "Look, my parents know people, my classmates and their parents know people, and while we unfortunately can't let you past the bike room, we'd like to work with you".

Show me a meritocracy and I'll show you the winners corrupting it for their friends and kids.

Re: You do need a technical co-founder [video]

#340

Post by [deleted] »

gnicholas wrote: post #335
j45 wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over the years, when I meet a non-technical founder looking for a technical founder, I ask them if they're ok owning as little of the startup that they offer to the technical person, until they can deliver sales. Technical people, in large do deliver a product and something that works. It might not be what the market wants, or the right thing, but speed of iteration, is again technical, and something the technical fo…

This is an interesting idea — variable vesting based on milestones. It would be a great way to reduce risk, though of course there are issues that could arise that would make this complicated. For example, if the technical person vests based on hitting certain product-related goals, does he get penalized if part of the dev team gets hired by another company, which makes it harder for him to hit the milestones? Or for…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN