91–100 of 171 posts
(Fake account to protect those involved.) I was very recently in your position. My advice to you: Get the f * out... NOW! If I had to guess, you were probably never that impressed/excited by your co-founders to begin with. But you did it because the business-case made sense. That's what I did, anyways, and it was one of the biggest mistakes I've ever made. If you think your co-founders are idiots, then it's over. If…
If you are a startup founder, which it sounds like you are, and not an early employee at a startup, then this is unfortunately the wrong attitude to have. There is no "their side of the deal", you are all committed to making the business work and you should be prepared to do whatever it takes to make it work including pushing all your own personal boundaries in order to get shit done.
In my experience the startups that have performed the best are ones where all the founders are prepared to roll up their sleeves and do things they have no experience with if necessary. The ones that fail are the ones that squabble over who's messing up at "their part of the deal".
Too many times I've seen founders (especially tech founders) sit doe-eyed, waiting for someone else to set the direction, or raise money, or figure out the "business model". If this is you then you should look into joining another startup as an early employee rather than being a founder yourself.
If you objectively believe that your team does not have the skills necessary to succeed or even move on to the next step then you need to leave. Plain and simple.
But leave or stay, lose the attitude that certain things are above or beneath your ability to do, or even worse: "not your job".
(Fake account to protect those involved.) I was very recently in your position. My advice to you: Get the f * out... NOW! If I had to guess, you were probably never that impressed/excited by your co-founders to begin with. But you did it because the business-case made sense. That's what I did, anyways, and it was one of the biggest mistakes I've ever made. If you think your co-founders are idiots, then it's over. If…
This is dangerous thinking. It's never too late to cut your losses. If you are sure this will not work, just move on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's easy to presume that sunk costs should have no weight when considering the relative value of different options. For many endeavours a certain amount of investment is required before returns are seen - investments in time and money in particular. For this reason there is almost always a cost to be considered switching between endeavours. So, while I agree that throwing good money after bad is a silly thing to do,…
I think you misunderstand sunk cost. Sunk cost basically just says to always employ a purely-forward-looking strategy when evaluating costs and benefits. > vs how much some other endeavour will take to become profitable AND how much it will cost to switch. Wait, what are these two costs? Aren't they the same? Where did the cost of switching come from?
I don't think I misunderstand sunk cost, but perhaps I didn't explain my point well enough.
I agree that you need to be forward looking, but whilst looking forward it can be important to consider existing investment. Existing investment is not ALWAYS worth nothing, so its value needs to be accounted for. Existing investment is also a metric that, whilst lending itself to entwining one in the Sunk Cost Fallacy, is an important part of answering the question "how much more investment is needed?"
The sunk cost fallacy applies in a situation where previous investment has been lost. The typical example is in gambling, where each spin of the wheel is independent of how much you have already lost on the table. When in a startup, however, previous investment is not necessarily lost, so switching to a new one is (typically) not the same as continuing one you have already invested in.
>> vs how much some other endeavour will take to become profitable AND how much it will cost to switch.
> Wait, what are these two costs? Aren't they the same? Where did the cost of switching come from?
The cost of switching is a way of characterising things like lost earnings and payouts that are not directly related to starting a new endeavour. They are typically, though not always, constant regardless of the new endeavour being considered, and so it makes sense to keep them separate.
Examples of switching costs:
* paying out a phone contract;
* loss of long service benefits (if someone is close to receiving long service benefits they will typically wait to receive them before switching jobs);
* non-compete clauses.
This situation is actually very simple, don't let it feel overcomplicated: Tell them you need an actual salary and actual health insurance in the next 30 days. If the venture can pay you to keep at it, that's great. Otherwise you'll have to start looking around for a real job in a couple of weeks. Even the most brick-and-mortar type of businessperson will completely understand this. Stick to your schedule. It will ei…
Disagree. If you've truly lost faith in the founders and business -- which you have -- you should leave now & cut your losses. It's not going to work out, regardless of salary. As for how to make money after you leave -- get a job or find consulting work. Then jump back into starting a business when you're ready again.
This sounds like you'd be okay if the business model was different. Tell them that either the business model changes or you're leaving. Then it's up to them whether you leave. You may or may not be able to negotiate interpersonal problems.
The startup? Almost irrelevant, in comparison. When you look back on this in ten years, you'll agree with me!
After you've proposed, sit down with your fiancée (an awesome proposal is one where she can't say no!) and ask her what she honestly thinks of the business. Women are far better judges of these things than men - particularly men who are building the thing in question. If she doesn't think it's compelling, simply tell the other guys you are getting married and need a steady job, so you're leaving. You've learned a lot (about finding good co-founders, as well as al the tech stuff) and are a more valuable person because of it, so take that as your payment.
If she thinks the business is a great idea, things get more complicated. My suggestion would be leave, find a better co-founder, and start over. Or you could try to negotiate with the other guys for some up front payment and changes to the way they do things.
Honestly, the biggest asset I can see from your message is your girlfriend. Spend the next few days working on an awesome proposal, instead of working for people you don't respect any more. The startup? Almost irrelevant, in comparison. When you look back on this in ten years, you'll agree with me! After you've proposed, sit down with your fiancée (an awesome proposal is one where she can't say no!) and ask her what…