|
You know how everyone says it's really important to co-found? They are so right. gently caress.
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2012 22:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 01:50 |
|
|
Sorry for the delay on answering. Not unrelated! Essentially, as a sole founder, you're going to be the sole technical member of your team for a little while*. Ok fine cool, but you'll code for 9 hours a day, you could get so much done! But the problem is that after a while there's this whole massive category of 'founder-stuff' which you can't outsource and no-one else can do for you - recruiting, talking to potential partners, managing people, raising money, networking, etc etc - and all of it takes priority over coding new stuff. Also users keep suggesting really positive changes to the existing codebase! So development of New Stuff ends up taking unbelievably long, like way longer than it'd take if you were just working on it on the side while you had a job. I have really really good non-technical employees and they deal with a ton of this stuff for me but there's still enough of it that *has* to be me that it's totally disruptive to work. Anyway the bit that prompted the "gently caress" was - I've been thinking this, and realising that I need to get a high-equity tech person on board as a sort of retroactive cofounder - except I totally totally don't have time to hunt and vet such a person! So now it's a trap. Here is a much shorter version: if 50% of the fully evolved company would still be gently caress-you money, cofound, it doesn't matter and it'll massively boost yr chances of success in all kinds of ways, If 50% of the fully evolved company wouldn't be gently caress-you money, it is a silly company anyway, don't bother. *: None of this may apply if you live in SV, where "I have a CS degree" gets you 100k in angel funding - I'm basing this on ecosystems where you need like a product before people will lend you money.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2012 19:25
|
|