[HN Gopher] What do people want in a co-founder?
___________________________________________________________________
What do people want in a co-founder?
Author : sandslash
Score : 85 points
Date : 2021-10-21 15:01 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (blog.ycombinator.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (blog.ycombinator.com)
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| > 65% of founders do Product
|
| > 57% of founders do Operations
|
| > 52% of founders do Sales and Marketing
|
| > 37% of founders do Design
|
| > 31% of founders do Engineering
|
| > Engineers seem to be in high demand. Among founders who do not
| do Engineering, 80% prefer a co-founder who does Engineering.
|
| This mirrors what I've seen in every co-founder matching forum: A
| huge imbalance of soft skills over engineering experience.
|
| I'm sure some of those founders are extremely talented at
| product, operations, sales, and design. However, there are many
| others who fit the classic "idea guy" stereotype.
|
| One thing I've learned from using co-founder matchmaking services
| like this is how hard it is to tell the difference between the
| two types of founders from credentials alone. A striking number
| of the people with impressive resumes and FAANG backgrounds got
| there by mastering big company skills and working their way up
| the ladder and through interview processes. Eventually they
| conclude that a startup is just more of the same big skills but
| with them at the top of the org chart.
|
| Some of the most promising people I've talked to on these
| platforms had less traditionally impressive resumes. They didn't
| necessarily have Ivy League university backgrounds or FAANG
| companies on their resume. That's likely what led them to use
| these platforms in the first place: Smaller personal networks
| that necessitate reaching farther for potential co-founders.
|
| These services can be interesting, but it really feels like a
| numbers game. Be prepared to take a lot of conversations very
| quickly, don't let impressive credentials alone sway you, and
| don't get discouraged by the volume of negative matches.
| mancerayder wrote:
| I'd like to comment here as a tech person that's moved into
| management. Not as a founder, but I've done consulting in the
| past and I've worked in all sized companies.
|
| As I've become less technical, I occasionally come across the
| highly technical, often almost genius-like engineer who fails
| to comprehend organizational structure and social structures.
| They fail to 'see' them, so sometimes decisions that you make
| as manager, or that the company makes, feel foreign to them.
| And so they often have cynical ideas (often found online) about
| companies, managers and so forth.
|
| While some of the cynical stuff can often be true, my point is
| this: the successful engineer is also someone with social
| skills, and that includes company skills as you put it.
|
| The person with pure ladder climbing skills is a fraud. But the
| person who can both be technical 'enough' and understand
| organizational and human structures can help things scale.
|
| What's missing from the conversation is Creativity, I think, or
| maybe it's me that's out of touch. Successful people seem to be
| ones that aren't afraid to take unique approaches to solving
| problems. Sometimes 'engineers' are highly talented but they're
| looking for blueprints and patterns to follow rather than
| create - and I am not talking about code.
| waprin wrote:
| I briefly floated a profile on there, though I decided to take a
| new full time job and focus on that for a while instead.
|
| While on the platform, I was flooded with non technical people
| who didn't have much besides an idea and an MBA. I guess if they
| could credibly raise money/sell product then maybe it would make
| sense but I was highly skeptical of the value add, and I got the
| feeling a lot of them were looking for a free dev to build some
| big product that they now get to shop around to investors, taking
| 50% of the equity for doing so.
|
| The #1 skill I am always hoping to find someone with that I vibe
| with is design. No matter what you build, both UX design and a
| consistent visual aesthetic are very important. For some reason
| SWEs make more money than designers in industry but whenever
| you're at startup network events it always seems SWEs outnumber
| designers 3 to 1. And likewise I didn't see many people with
| design portfolios on this platform.
|
| I'm surprised so few people care about where there cofounder
| lives. It seems YC is geared towards situations where you go all
| in, work hard full time on the project etc. That would be a
| situation where I would most care about a strong relationship
| that I think would be much easier to build in person.
| kirillzubovsky wrote:
| > "people who didn't have much besides an idea and an MBA"
|
| I've not tried any co-founder dating sites, but this rings
| hilarious true based on a few conversations I've had in the
| past. Basically X-airbnb-stripe-froogle-box employees, who were
| able to raise tens of millions based on an idea, and nothing
| else, now looking for "co-founders" to whom they are willing to
| give 1% of equity. Made me lol a little.
| [deleted]
| nicoburns wrote:
| For me it would be sales and the "business" side of things. And
| perhaps some domain expertise. I can do design competently
| enough to make it work (I do most the design work at my current
| company despite nominally being the lead software engineer).
|
| The problem I have is that I have no idea how one would go
| about evaluating someones capability at that skillset.
| robocat wrote:
| > The problem I have is that I have no idea how one would go
| about evaluating someones capability at that skillset.
|
| I am a typical engineer type, and the few times I have
| correctly picked someone was when I was working directly with
| them - you can then tell real talent from their real world
| effects, even if it is not your own skill set.
|
| Also one critical attribute when selecting a co-founder is
| integrity - if you can't trust them then their other skills
| don't matter. Working closely with someone gives you a chance
| to judge that - it is otherwise very difficult.
| kilbuz wrote:
| What other side of a startup is there, besides "business"?
| OnlineGladiator wrote:
| > The problem I have is that I have no idea how one would go
| about evaluating someones capability at that skillset.
|
| I'm not pretending this is the best way to approach it (I'd
| approach it very differently, but I have the benefit of
| already having started my own company), but start with the
| obvious: ask them what they'd contribute and just let the
| questions flow naturally from there. If they can't sell
| themselves to you, they almost certainly can't sell
| themselves to investors, customers, and future employees.
| yarcob wrote:
| > I'm surprised so few people care about where there cofounder
| lives.
|
| If I wanted to find someone in my city, a global website would
| be the last place I'd look. Maybe the people who use a global
| matching platform are more interested in finding someone with
| specific skills / interests rather than someone who lives
| nearby.
| waprin wrote:
| Well even if I want to find someone local, doesn't mean I can
| just walk outside and find them, especially since the
| pandemic shut down most events in the Bay Area. Dating apps
| seem pretty popular and I think vast majority of people on
| those platforms are looking for someone local.
| yarcob wrote:
| It took many years before dating platforms became viable. I
| remember trying some dating websites early on, and there
| just weren't any people in my area at all. It was fun
| looking at the profiles, but it wasn't actually useful for
| meeting people yet.
|
| I would assume that a cofounder matching platform with
| 16000 profiles has a similar problem, it's just too few
| people to bother looking for local matches.
| jasode wrote:
| _> Maybe the people who use a global matching platform are
| more interested in finding someone with specific skills /
| interests rather than someone who lives nearby._
|
| Maybe there's a misunderstanding because there are no obvious
| screen shots but it says you can filter on _location_. Thus,
| a "global" matching platform becomes a _local_ one. It 's
| not is if one is endlessly scrolling 15000 profiles hoping
| for a local person to appear.
|
| It's still a relative numbers game. Finding a nearby
| potential co-founder in a subset on a _popular_ website such
| as YC is more likely than a local website such as
| lasvegas.craigslist.org
| ctvo wrote:
| > _The #1 skill I am always hoping to find someone with that I
| vibe with is design. No matter what you build, both UX design
| and a consistent visual aesthetic are very important_
|
| Is it surprising? Design is cheap, and outsourced. You can go
| very far with a single contractor designer picked up from
| dribbble.com (think ~1-5k USD max for the entire MVP and
| marketing site). The quality is excellent and will last you
| well into later funding rounds.
|
| Another thing to consider is products that differentiate on UX
| are much harder to launch. And when they do, it's more
| engineering than design that ensures it succeeds. I think about
| SnapChat. It's great to say X would be a great user experience,
| but boy, good luck finding a skilled iOS dev to make that
| happen.
| robocat wrote:
| > Design is cheap, and outsourced
|
| I think the concept we need here is "taste" - that ability to
| recognise something is great, and ideally the ability to know
| what will work and be able to make it happen.
|
| Often you want to have a designer because you are paying them
| for their taste, and perhaps not so much for their technical
| skills. Perhaps you personally are the opposite, where you
| have the taste and ability to spec, and you just want to have
| someone do what you ask.
|
| There is a stereotype of founders with no taste, who drive
| the production of hideous products.
|
| A sensible founder that doesn't have great taste needs a
| cofounder or employee that does have great taste, and the
| founder needs to give that person the authority to drive the
| aesthetic of the product. That role is usually given to a
| designer - and I suspect that you are misunderstanding what
| waprin (the person you are replying to) meant.
| waprin wrote:
| By that logic, you can hire a freelance dev to do all the
| programming too. There are some pretty good people out there
| who aren't that expensive. But there's a bunch of risks with
| that approach and they are similar to the ones where you
| outsource design - you will constantly have to re-hire if you
| need pivots, there might be major friction switching people,
| and the costs can start to add up. It's not 100% analogous,
| freelance design is a bit cheaper, it's easier to spot bad
| designers etc, but I think the analogy somewhat holds.
|
| Consider that the #1 market cap YC company of all time -
| AirBnB - was started by 2 founders with a background in
| design.
| mbesto wrote:
| > By that logic, you can hire a freelance dev to do all the
| programming too.
|
| And there's plenty of successful companies that do this
| btw.
|
| > But there's a bunch of risks with that approach and they
| are similar to the ones where you outsource design - you
| will constantly have to re-hire if you need pivots, there
| might be major friction switching people, and the costs can
| start to add up.
|
| This is simply not true. This can happen regardless of
| wether you outsource your dev team or not.
|
| > Consider that the #1 market cap YC company of all time -
| AirBnB - was started by 2 founders with a background in
| design.
|
| One of the top 50 largest companies in the world was
| started by an engineer who dropped out of school. What's
| your point? Correlation != causation.
|
| Outsourcing is such a dirty word here and I don't get it.
| It's objectively not a _bad_ option, it just has different
| risks.
| ctvo wrote:
| > _By that logic, you can hire a freelance dev to do all
| the programming too._
|
| The market for developer talent and designer talent are
| visibly different. Different in terms of supply,
| compensation (as a factor of supply), and risk (due to the
| compensation!). Risk here is you mostly take the word of
| the developer they're competent. We come up with elaborate
| interview processes for this (if you have an idea for a
| better process... ). For a designer, a portfolio clearly
| demonstrates they're competent. This makes outsourcing and
| freelancing more viable, increasing supply, and driving
| down the overall costs, in my opinion.
|
| I won't touch on actual skill / investment in becoming a
| good designer vs. developer except to say I think there's
| differences there too, at least outside of the tail.
|
| I would circle back to my second point, that even if you
| have an excellent designer, someone still needs to
| implement it and not make it janky. I think it explains, as
| a whole, why people gravitate towards engineering co-
| founders if they don't have the skillset.
|
| > _Consider that the #1 market cap YC company of all time -
| AirBnB - was started by 2 founders with a background in
| design._
|
| I don't think Airbnb won on design or would consider design
| its moat. Designers can also be excellent leaders and
| executives.
| waprin wrote:
| Fair points, but a note on AirBnB with the caveat that I
| only know the public information and never worked there.
| To me, their only moat is their brand and the network
| effects they built with that brand. The famous stories
| are them fundraising by selling Obama themed cheerios,
| and going to apartments helping hosts take better
| pictures. Neither of those things are the "cranking out
| iPhone mocks" you'd expect from a freelance designer but
| seem like stories fundamentally linked to their design
| backgrounds and ability to tell stories in the visual
| world. Strong design probably matters more for something
| like Snapchat than Coinbase so I'm sure it depends.
| You're probably right in your explanation for why Eng
| skills are more in demand but I still suspect you're
| understating the impact of a great designer.
| ctvo wrote:
| In my opinion empathy for users (doubly important in a
| multi sided marketplace e.g. hosts and guests) helped
| Airbnb succeed. They no doubt removed friction, and
| prioritized that internally, and that helped them become
| an aggregator for their new market but unclear if it was
| due to being designers that provided this insight.
|
| I think for an early stage startup you need to make
| tradeoffs. What skills can we get with our founding
| team's overlap, and what skills can we easily fill? Of
| course, the person matters so much more than these
| checkboxes, and I don't think anyone would suggest _not_
| working with a designer, but I think it does explain why
| so many are looking for technical founders.
| waprin wrote:
| But I was complaining about the exact opposite- I have a
| hard time finding potential design cofounders as an
| engineer, and every hackathon and similar events seems to
| be filled with engineers , but short on designers even
| though designers win pitches more than engineers (you can
| fake implementation for a demo but can't fake design).
|
| The fact that it's harder to find designers than
| engineers for founders despite the opposite dynamic in
| the job market is what I was saying was surprising.
|
| The platform does not have many designers looking for
| technical founders. As I said, it's filled with MBAs.
| When pressed what skills they would contribute, they say
| things like "backend finance." Usually either they have
| no money but need you to build a complex project before
| you can think about raising money (raising the question
| why not just build it and pitch VCs yourself), or they
| already raised money but want to give you some absurdly
| low percentage (you're not really cofounder).
|
| Are there people in there that would be able to raise
| money /sell the product if you built it? Maybe but others
| have discussed why that's the hardest of all skills to
| vet for.
|
| Either way if the platform was filled with strong
| designers interested in partnering with technical
| cofounders I'd be much happier and speak more highly of
| it.
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| > I'm surprised so few people care about where there cofounder
| lives.
|
| I got the impression that many of the people using these
| services felt they had already exhausted their local networks
| and decided to look more broadly.
|
| I also suspect that many of these founders plan to build full-
| remote companies anyway.
|
| That I said - I agree. I'd want my co-founder to be local if at
| all possible, even though I've worked remotely for many years.
| The co-founder relationship is too important.
| mrkramer wrote:
| A friend who is ready to help and who will not leave me when
| difficult times come.
| Graffur wrote:
| Someone nice, eager, available, smart and driven
| wanderinghogan wrote:
| A tech-literate business person who is around the same life stage
| as me (or are sympathetic/able to work with people in different
| life stages), if I were looking.
| fierro wrote:
| killer instinct
| jollybean wrote:
| First issues are Integrity, Trust, 'Business Maturity' (i.e. can
| communicate reasonably, operationally competent) etc..
|
| It's like a rocky marriage with divorces and re-marriages, you
| have to really trust and get along, even when visions are not
| aligned.
|
| If you don't have that it will be very difficult.
| timavr wrote:
| - Decent Human Being - Hard Worker - Wicked Smart - Someone I
| want to spend time with
| earksiinni wrote:
| I signed up for the platform as an engineer looking for non-
| engineers. Unlike some of the engineer types here, I'm of the
| opinion that engineering is as important (not more important)
| than non-technical skill sets. In some startups, it's probably
| less important.
|
| The problem is that the profiles I match with read like resumes.
| I don't care too much that you were early employee at XYZ Corp or
| that you had a successful $100m exit. I care about your heart.
|
| I've cofounded too many times with cofounders whose worldview,
| politics, and level of emotional empathy and openness were
| incompatible with mine. It sucked every time and was the #1 cause
| for failure.
|
| Sometimes I feel like a vox clamantis in deserto when it comes to
| advocating for founders with higher emotional awareness. I'm
| happy whenever I read posts on HN about why neurodiversity
| matters in tech, but they almost always focus on folks on the
| spectrum. Then there are folks like me, oftentimes survivors of
| abuse who are neuro-atypical in a different way. We are empaths--
| and very much not fitting in the mold of a "typical" engineer or
| how non-engineers perceive typical engineers.
|
| I don't need a fellow empath as a co-founder, but at least I need
| someone who understands where I'm coming from and is compatible.
| Brag sheets tend to drive me away, but that's the ethos we've
| built into our industry, so I don't blame the individuals.
| theaussiestew wrote:
| I've had the experience that you mention here too, basically a
| really competent co-founder but someone with a vastly different
| worldview. You can't really change someone's worldview, so it
| was tough to find out later.
|
| I'm curious, what area of need would you service if you did
| find a co-founder that was more self-aware?
| what_is_orcas wrote:
| Fellow engineer here who cares about the same things you report
| here.
|
| Did you just give up (using that platform)? Did you find a
| better platform?
| earksiinni wrote:
| I didn't give up per se, but I'm not actively checking it,
| either. Sometimes I get emails about matches, which I read.
| Haven't found any that clicked so far.
|
| Right now, though, I'm going through a phase where I'm
| doubting whether I want to do a startup at all. Still fully
| onboard for entrepreneurship, but I'm questioning whether the
| startup path (especially the VC path) is right for my goals.
|
| I am, however, interested in making organic connections with
| like-minded individuals. Perhaps like right here, in the
| comments of HN ;-)
| sam0x17 wrote:
| Technical founders who have decided to take on bizdev stuff in
| this role but know what they're talking about when it comes to
| the tech stack are an incredible asset. Nothing better than an
| ex-engineer as a COO/CEO/etc
| [deleted]
| weezin wrote:
| Someone good at things I suck at.
| andrew_ wrote:
| My needs are simple: Deep domain knowledge and deep trust.
| avmich wrote:
| Can the latter be had at all, in a short order? Maybe if it's
| impossible, another criteria would be useful?
| ksec wrote:
| My thought on the issue is to talk about hard topics (
| politics ). I think that is the easiest way to test one
| person's character.
| notenoughbeans wrote:
| I want someone that can sell what I've built.
| yarcob wrote:
| I've met (and worked with) people who built something, and were
| looking for someone to sell it.
|
| The unfortunate truth is that this usually doesn't work because
| of two reasons:
|
| 1) If you can't convince anybody to buy your product, you also
| won't be able to convince anybody to sell your product. You
| need to be able to at least sell your idea to the cofounder.
|
| 2) If you've never tried selling your product, and have never
| interacted with your customers, chances are that what you built
| doesn't solve anybodys problem. I've never seen a successful
| product that was a hit right away without any user testing and
| iteration based on user feedback, but some people are convinced
| their product is different.
| hunterb123 wrote:
| This. I love developing, marketing, and branding but I have no
| connections.
|
| I want someone to handle people and let me handle product.
| jollybean wrote:
| 1) You want someone who can tell you what will sell, if you
| build it.
|
| 2) Also, it's never clear. So you want someone who you can work
| with to forge a path through the jungle.
| anonymouse008 wrote:
| What have you built?
| short12 wrote:
| What have you sold is a far far more important question
| notenoughbeans wrote:
| I have created some low-code, zero-code devtools for personal
| use I want to polish and get on the market.
| anonymouse008 wrote:
| Hot market right now -- have a (public) readme / repo /
| anything?
| notenoughbeans wrote:
| Still a work in progress. I'm planning on sharing it once
| it's more ready.
| Grimm1 wrote:
| In my experience that's a trap, if you have a small set
| of useable features, release it now and get feedback from
| real people.
| andrewnc wrote:
| As they say in the start up world "Ship It!"
|
| I've seen lots of advice that says people ship too late.
| I'm not sure if that's the case here, but something to
| consider.
| halfmatthalfcat wrote:
| Don't pay attention to the other "just ship it" comments,
| it'll be ready when it's ready. Too many people like to
| walk out that trite phrase when they have no knowledge on
| what you're doing or where you're at yet want to seem
| like they know something you don't. It's annoying.
| Grimm1 wrote:
| First, at least in regards to my comment -- that's
| entirely reductionist. Second, I commented because it's
| one of the hardest things, in my opinion as an engineer
| myself, to overcome. You're interpretation of people
| wanting to seem like someone knows something they don't
| is at best uncharitable. My comment comes from a place of
| hopefully being helpful and giving someone a nudge for a
| thing that is definitely uncomfortable (showing your baby
| to the world) and showing some sense of camaraderie that
| a lot of us have been there.
| halfmatthalfcat wrote:
| It might seem helpful but it's not. Obviously this is my
| opinion but it's disrespectful to the engineer doing the
| work to essentially shame them into releasing something
| that they have a vision for early.
|
| Who knows what shape it's in, who knows if it's bugged?
| Releasing something to just get it out there and it's so
| bugged, the users run away.
|
| I understand why you are saying what you are saying but
| maybe try to look at it from a different perspective
| because whenever someone says that to me, it's demeaning.
| I (we) know what we're doing and perfectly capable of
| judging when something is "done".
| Grimm1 wrote:
| Edit: I'll make a quick edit because the below sounded
| too aggressive to me after reading it again like two
| minutes later. Your point that not everyone takes
| unsolicited advice well because it feels like it
| undermines their own skill and knowledge is noted and I
| have run into people who think similarly to you, but I
| think it's helpful more than not to a wider group of
| people and it helped me so I will consider the thought in
| a given situation but I will likely continue to give the
| advice.
|
| ----
|
| Right which is why I qualified it with "If you have a
| small set of useable features". Honestly, feeling shamed
| is your hang up, same with feeling demeaned. I've had
| that said to me and it motivated me and was helpful,
| because I had been holding back.
|
| I guess we'll agree to disagree because I don't know you
| and I don't want to like armchair psychology here. But,
| I'm certainly not going to tiptoe around every word
| though just because someone somewhere may be offended,
| especially in this case where I believe most people would
| find it helpful.
| halfmatthalfcat wrote:
| I'm also not directly targeting you, my comment was to
| the OP. There was another comment that said very similar
| things that you alluded to, which kind of helps prove my
| point that this advice is parroted everywhere without any
| consideration for the developer themselves and their
| unique situation.
| notenoughbeans wrote:
| Hey, I appreciate both of your advice. I have some usable
| features that work great on my dev environment, so now
| I'm mostly working on getting things reliably working in
| the cloud.
| short12 wrote:
| This is what I thought I had. But in reality both cofounders
| need to be hard sales people first and foremost and building
| shit becomes a distant 2nd priority.
|
| But I agree with you a hundred percent. That's the ideal
| situation for someone that likes to build
| sudosteph wrote:
| If I were to bring on a co-founder at this point, I'd want
| someone who is willing to live in the same city as me, is
| charming AF, and has some complementary skillset that will remain
| valuable as the company scales (sales/marketing and data
| engineering/analytics being the big two for my startup). But me
| and my co-founder are actually doing alright without a 3rd, so
| will probably just be picky about first hires.
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| > willing to live in the same city as me, is charming AF, and
| has some complementary skillset that will remain valuable
|
| A spouse tends to have all of these. Hmm...
| sudosteph wrote:
| Well, my spouse IS my current co-founder, so clearly I chose
| wisely.
| xwdv wrote:
| So you have a family business.
| dasil003 wrote:
| You know in 20+ years of founding and working at a bunch of
| different startups and companies ranging from big companies in
| fly-over country, to team-of-2 bootstrapped 6-figure businesses,
| and all the way up to super hot pre-IPO unicorns; one thing I've
| learned is that great people that you gel with and might want to
| start a company with are everywhere in equal proportions.
|
| Sure, there are probably slightly more of them in Silicon Valley,
| but also SV is full of wannabes who are playing house, so the
| signal to noise ratio is actually less. I feel any kind co-
| founder dating suffers from the exact same thing. YC's name gives
| it more legitimacy, but that very fact attracts more dedicated
| wannabes who are just playing house harder.
|
| Ultimately after all these years I keep coming back to Joel
| Spolsky's idea of working with people who are "smart and get
| things done". That's it. I am skeptical I will find someone I
| want to work with on a co-founder dating site, because the people
| I want to work with are too busy trying to do a thing with the
| resources available to them versus looking for a longshot silver
| bullet. There are exceptions of course, but this is just my gut
| instinct, you might take it with a grain of salt since I waste a
| lot of time commenting on HN :)
| jdavis703 wrote:
| > Sure, there are probably slightly more of them in Silicon
| Valley, but also SV is full of wannabes who are playing house,
| so the signal to noise ratio is actually less.
|
| I started in DC and moved to the SFBA. Maybe I was around the
| wrong people in DC, but it sure seems a lot easier to at least
| find good people out here. It's not that SV has magical water
| or anything. It's simply there's more people with startup
| experienced, and more people who come here to gain that
| experience.
|
| I imagine the reverse is also true. If government and policy
| were my passion, I prevent would've been best staying in DC.
| Even though there's plenty of talented government execs and
| policy experts everywhere.
| [deleted]
| dgs_sgd wrote:
| What is playing house?
| quotz wrote:
| Pretending
| andyferris wrote:
| Pretending.
|
| Kids play a game where someone pretends to be the mum, the
| dad, the baby, etc, and pretend be family. So someone is
| pretending be a responsible parent (and the commenter here is
| insinuating the wannabe co-founder is just pretending they
| have the necessary skills and abilities). As a kid, we never
| really had a name for it, but adults seem to refer to the
| activity as "playing house".
| dgs_sgd wrote:
| Ah, thanks
| giantg2 wrote:
| As The Offspring say, "the world needs wannabes" (Pretty Fly
| For A White Guy).
|
| I want to be a successful and well compensated software
| engineer. Thus I try. Maybe one day I will succeed.
| kirillzubovsky wrote:
| > "people I want to work with are too busy trying to do a thing
| with the resources available to them versus looking for a
| longshot silver bullet."
|
| Right on. Most people I'd co-found anything with in a heart
| beat are too busy with 101 things already. The question isn't
| who I would want to work with, but how to convince them that
| _this_ venture is worth dropping everything else in the world
| for.
| codegeek wrote:
| I have been on the y combinator co-founder portal and so far,
| it has not been that great. Most people either don't respond or
| if they do, they are really mostly interested in their own
| ideas and I know the irony of saying this because I have my own
| ideas.
|
| I really believe that finding a co-founder is almost impossible
| to plan but it is more of an accident. Unless you have worked
| with someone for a while and know their strengths and
| weaknesses, no site can solve this problem.
|
| Having said this, if you have a great co-founder, you truly are
| very lucky because I know how lonely it gets as a solo founder.
| smoldesu wrote:
| It might be a case of Survivorship Bias (erm... anti-bias).
| The people out there who are still looking for co-founders
| are likely saddled with a business proposition that most
| people find objectionable.
| mikepurvis wrote:
| Completely agree. I'm an employee right now, but if I were ever
| looking for a co-founder, my shortlist would be the people I've
| worked with, hacking together some random project at all hours.
| chadash wrote:
| _" Among founders who do not do Engineering, 80% prefer a co-
| founder who does Engineering."_
|
| I'm sure this familiar to any engineer on this site. "I have this
| great idea for an app, and I just need you to build it. We'll
| split the company 50/50."
| anyfactor wrote:
| As a dev I entertain this idea on 4 criteria - 1. You are a
| veteran in the target industry. 2. You have connections and you
| are well-liked. 3. You can sell to those people. 4. There is a
| mutual trust and respect between us.
|
| If you know the industry inside out and you are willing to
| sell, I would have no problem to partner up. But usually those
| who are successful in an industry rarely have enough time to
| invest in a startup.
|
| People I want to partner up with are so busy managing their
| business, client and family, they will just end up having a
| custom software made with their money and try to sell that.
| corobo wrote:
| "Oh cool! Show me your business plan!"
| yawnxyz wrote:
| At first I thought it'd be great to pick up engineering and say
| yes to some of these founders.
|
| After becoming a designer/engineer I've realized that most of
| these ideas take shape during the engineering process. And the
| process will in turn change and twist the idea itself based on
| customer interviews and iterative prototypes.
|
| The engineering process leads to better "ideas" that replace
| the initial ideas. But most non-engineer, first-time founders
| don't realize that's the case. The engineering process also
| pokes so many holes in the first idea, because they require the
| idea to actually be fleshed out...
|
| Maybe I'm just bitter about working with doe-eyed, non-
| technical first time "idea person" kind of founders.
| sushsjsuauahab wrote:
| Not applicable, I just need introductions to people who might
| want to buy what I sell, and a lawyer to protect me.
| WalterBright wrote:
| I want them to have the leet business skillz I don't have. I
| don't want a clone of myself with the same strengths and faults.
| dahart wrote:
| Having gone through it, I think the single most important things
| are missing. Your co-founder needs to have the same vision as
| you, they need to want the same outcome. And you don't find out
| that you want different outcomes for a _long_ time, it's very
| very easy in the beginning to agree you both want a successful
| company, for your software to be awesome, and for money to roll
| in. Later when things get real, you may discover your shared
| vision isn't quite as shared as you thought.
|
| The other thing I want in a co-founder is someone who will have
| my back unflinchingly and always when speaking to others, whether
| it's investors or customers or just friends and family, because
| inevitably things will come up that worry you which can sow
| mistrust if not caught quickly. I was lucky to have such a co-
| founder, and I actually feel guilty for worrying that they didn't
| always support me. I tried to return the trust at all times. But
| note that discovering differing visions can and does threaten
| your ability to know if a co-founder trusts you! I think it's a
| miracle that companies survive, knowing how easy it is for people
| to want different things.
| boulos wrote:
| Fwiw, the survey design missed an important aspect of "don't care
| about location": most people are probably assuming a lot of time
| zone overlap. So they might say "don't care about location" (true
| in some sense), but wouldn't have said "Yes! Sign me up for a
| 12-hour time difference!".
| giantg2 wrote:
| This sounds like a cool service. I wish I had more time and
| skills to make a profile.
| handrous wrote:
| - Fat rolodex full of rich people they know well enough that they
| might say yes to chatting over golf, and who aren't risk-averse
| (I have zero such people in mine, so this would be a must).
|
| - Domain knowledge--but, very specifically, knowledge of how to
| navigate the legal and business environment of that domain,
| especially all the "secret" stuff. If they don't know what X or Y
| is called or how to do some procedure that only low-on-the-totem-
| pole people do, that's fine--if they've got the rest of this,
| then they'll surely know people we can ask/interview for those
| parts.
|
| - At least enough sales skills to get the folks from the first
| point to fund us OR to make some useful introductions OR to
| grease some wheels.
| neonate wrote:
| Are golf and such things still important to startups nowadays?
| I would have hoped that was dying off already.
| Kluny wrote:
| You can meet people at improv club, hockey or mountain biking
| instead, but you still have to meet people somehow, right?
| lisper wrote:
| And you are _much_ more likely to meet potential investors
| on a golf course than at an improv club.
| snarf21 wrote:
| I think it is still important to Angels. Angels want to
| invest in people/teams that are "like" them. They are more
| likely to trust other country club types that they assume
| have the same background and social circles they do. A lot of
| Angels don't care about the money or the return, it is about
| having stuff to talk about over drinks or between holes on
| the course. "I'm in a couple of blockchain start-ups that are
| really promising". It is about being interesting and in the
| know. Viability is meaningless.
| aketchum wrote:
| "golf" is just a euphemism that sometimes literally means
| golf, but other times means any type of social activity that
| can be used to build relationships. What did you hope was
| dying off? There will always be a need for people who have
| and can form strong relationships with rich people who are
| looking for new investments.
| kilbuz wrote:
| Golf was big and is now bigger. Drawing in many younger
| folks, too.
| mbesto wrote:
| If you're in enterprise software, yes.
|
| Try selling your CRM to the VP of Sales of a regional
| retailer who lives in Phoenix and NOT take him out to play
| golf.
| handrous wrote:
| So are country clubs, and social clubs that organize
| fundraising galas and such. Joining them to make useful
| business contacts very probably works pretty well (I've not
| tried, but I've done some looking--note that the social clubs
| are usually exclusively for women--yes, even in 2021--but men
| attend the events). Tennis is still huge. Skiing. That stuff
| changes slowly, if at all--you and I just aren't part of it,
| so we can imagine it's some old-fashioned thing that's all
| but extinct, if we don't go looking for it.
|
| Most of the shit from the now-ancient Official Preppy
| Handbook is still _basically_ true, in fact, as far as I can
| tell.
|
| The tech version of "where to meet people to make
| connections" is probably rock climbing gyms, right now.
| That'd be for barely-rich new money people connected to tech,
| or for programmers if you're looking to hire. Every group has
| their in-crowd preferences.
| bastardoperator wrote:
| Some people still think the biggest deals are happening on
| the golf course, I think most deals over the past 18 months
| likely happened via zoom.
| dgfitz wrote:
| Oh I'm not so sure. I know a LOT of people who took up golf
| during last summer/fall. It was one of the few outdoor
| sports you could safely play with friends.
| RussianCow wrote:
| This is very far from dying off. A friend of mine recently
| started a company, and close to 100% of the money they raised
| was a direct result of squeezing into golf games, ski trips,
| and retreats with prospective investors. My salesperson
| friends regularly score very large deals over games of golf
| or similar activities.
|
| You'd think that the merits of your product would be enough
| to carry your sales, but in practice, sales is primarily
| driven by your network, which involves getting close to as
| many people as possible. Turns out, it's easier to do that
| over golf than via formal meetings.
| costcofries wrote:
| I think the answer is usually, someone who has skills that you
| don't. When I think about looking for a co-founder, I know what
| specific skills I am looking for, there is a gap, this second
| person would fill that gap. Some other thoughts:
|
| - Specific skill set (what is their expertise) - Values alignment
| - Ways of working (work life balance, etc) - Communication style
| - Conflict resolution and disagreement management
| zalebz wrote:
| A few initial thoughts jump out at me:
|
| someone I respect in a domain of life I respect (could be
| music/athletics/relationships/humor/whatever but ultimately it is
| a reason I enjoy them as a person and in times of adversity can't
| dismiss them as a disposable generic employee)
|
| moreover, the above attribute also often demonstrates a healthy
| life balance outside of work, and this will help prevent
| workaholic burnout which is a very real pitfall ina startup
|
| someone that has motivation/ambition in a domain(s) that I do not
| (maybe I can do a particular skill and even at a competent level,
| but I'd rather have a partner that enjoys it and reads up about
| it in their spare time even if they aren't as "good" at that
| skill as I am right now)
|
| someone that has been challenged in life in some fashion. again
| the domain isn't as important as the experience of facing
| pressure/adversity and finding that extra gear within oneself to
| emerge. and furthermore then wanting to start the next challenge
| despite having already gone through the wringer. in my experience
| there are people who thrive under pressure and those that tend to
| hide/crumble when challenged. you obviously want the former and
| some that has been tested.
|
| there are plenty of other attributes that are covered by great
| replies that I won't repeat. I felt these seemed a bit distinct
| (at least when I posted) and worth mentioning
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-10-22 23:00 UTC)