Ask HN: Where to meet non-technical cofounders?
98 comments
From Paul Graham (http://www.paulgraham.com/bronze.html):
> The good news is, choosing problems is something that can be learned. I know that from experience. Hackers can learn to make things customers want. [6]
>This is a controversial view. One expert on "entrepreneurship" told me that any startup had to include business people, because only they could focus on what customers wanted. I'll probably alienate this guy forever by quoting him, but I have to risk it, because his email was such a perfect example of this view:
> The good news is, choosing problems is something that can be learned. I know that from experience. Hackers can learn to make things customers want. [6]
>This is a controversial view. One expert on "entrepreneurship" told me that any startup had to include business people, because only they could focus on what customers wanted. I'll probably alienate this guy forever by quoting him, but I have to risk it, because his email was such a perfect example of this view:
80% of MIT spinoffs succeed provided they have at least one management person in the team at the start. The business person represents the "voice of the customer" and that's what keeps the engineers and product development on track.
You can understand the customer backwards and forwards, but I think you still need a business person who both knows how to court funding, and is willing to spend all their time doing that.
One example, from my past, abandoned self-funded startup: my co-founder (customer domain expert) and I (all-in-one engineering) didn't want to be the ones courting VC, but we were also too slow to seek out a startup business person. For maybe two reasons:
1. We had a couple outside-the-box approaches, which would only really resonate with users because we weren't doing something in the way every other CEO in that space did it.
2. We were busy, and didn't know offhand where to look for the kind of CEO we needed -- who we'd trust to embrace the approach, not twist it before launch, nor (ethically worse) bait&switch our users afterwards.
Maybe some kind of incubator would've helped us launch and get far enough for the right CEO to come to us. But we didn't have time to jump through the hoops of something like YC, for a small chance at a small amount of funding. And the process still seems oriented towards founders who want to be doing all the business stuff.
PG might've sought to mold technical founders into business people -- but some technical people already have some idea what business is about, and know they'd rather someone else (trustworthy!) do the business parts they don't want to do much of.
One example, from my past, abandoned self-funded startup: my co-founder (customer domain expert) and I (all-in-one engineering) didn't want to be the ones courting VC, but we were also too slow to seek out a startup business person. For maybe two reasons:
1. We had a couple outside-the-box approaches, which would only really resonate with users because we weren't doing something in the way every other CEO in that space did it.
2. We were busy, and didn't know offhand where to look for the kind of CEO we needed -- who we'd trust to embrace the approach, not twist it before launch, nor (ethically worse) bait&switch our users afterwards.
Maybe some kind of incubator would've helped us launch and get far enough for the right CEO to come to us. But we didn't have time to jump through the hoops of something like YC, for a small chance at a small amount of funding. And the process still seems oriented towards founders who want to be doing all the business stuff.
PG might've sought to mold technical founders into business people -- but some technical people already have some idea what business is about, and know they'd rather someone else (trustworthy!) do the business parts they don't want to do much of.
As a technical CEO, I was good at sales and getting deals. I didn't have the focus to close deals though. I had a non-tech co-founder, but he wasn't CEO and he couldn't close things like funding all on his own.
Putting the best tech person as CEO effectively makes it a solo founder effort. The ideal is the business person as CEO, or perhaps some multi-talented person where product development is fully delegated to a CTO.
Putting the best tech person as CEO effectively makes it a solo founder effort. The ideal is the business person as CEO, or perhaps some multi-talented person where product development is fully delegated to a CTO.
If you need a business person on your team, it's because you need business and you need to be a business, and that's what the business person should be doing. Marketing, closing deals, arranging funding, talking to the lawyers, talking to the accountants, doing HR. If they're really good they're also managing the business process, making sure everyone's happy, communicating and performing and on target.
It's not actually multiple persons that you need on your team, it's different roles. The technical person, the product person, the management person, the visionary, the organized person, there's probably a dozen more personality traits that are helpful if not essential. They could all be in the same person, but it's more likely it's 2 or 3. They don't all need to be founders, but the more committed they are to the company, the better that aspect is reflected in the company, and the more succesful it might be.
Google didn't need any marketing, they just needed engineers, so they hired engineers, and people who could hire engineers, and people who could manage engineers. By the time they needed something else they were already making so much money they could afford to motivate excellence by monetary compensation alone, not every start up has that luxury.
It's not actually multiple persons that you need on your team, it's different roles. The technical person, the product person, the management person, the visionary, the organized person, there's probably a dozen more personality traits that are helpful if not essential. They could all be in the same person, but it's more likely it's 2 or 3. They don't all need to be founders, but the more committed they are to the company, the better that aspect is reflected in the company, and the more succesful it might be.
Google didn't need any marketing, they just needed engineers, so they hired engineers, and people who could hire engineers, and people who could manage engineers. By the time they needed something else they were already making so much money they could afford to motivate excellence by monetary compensation alone, not every start up has that luxury.
> Larry Page and Sergey Brin were grad students in computer science, which presumably makes them "engineers." Do you suppose Google is only good because they had some business guy whispering in their ears what customers wanted?
Larry Page and Sergey Brin originally wanted Google to be a pay-to-use service and were against ads. I don't know how they came to their change in business model, but I suspect it was after they hired people that weren't engineers to help.
Larry Page and Sergey Brin originally wanted Google to be a pay-to-use service and were against ads. I don't know how they came to their change in business model, but I suspect it was after they hired people that weren't engineers to help.
It occurred after Eric Schmidt took over operational control of Google. He focused in on a rational business model (swiped from GoTo.com [1]), it's specifically why the venture capitalists installed him. Schmidt had both an engineering background and management experience. The story I recall from back then was about John Doerr telling Schmidt to not fuck it up (recounted in a nicer way by Schmidt, below [2]); the advertising runway was pretty simple for Google, given the product they were building under the hood.
Schmidt joined Google in March 2001. For all of 1999 Google only had $220,000 in revenue (founded Sept 1998). Their early, primitive experiments in advertising worked well enough, they brought in $19m in revenue for 2000 (which would increase 300% in 2001, and then 400% in 2002).
[1] 2013: https://slate.com/business/2013/10/googles-big-break-how-bil...
[2] 2005: https://www.gq.com/story/google-larry-sergey
> Schmidt met all of Larry and Sergey's stringent criteria. He had a credible name, a Ph.D. (from Berkeley), and he promised not to push the boys aside or dismantle the quirky culture they'd engendered. "The board members told me, basically, 'Don't screw this thing up!' " Schmidt says. "They said, 'It needs some infrastructure, some growing, but the gem here is very real.'"
Schmidt joined Google in March 2001. For all of 1999 Google only had $220,000 in revenue (founded Sept 1998). Their early, primitive experiments in advertising worked well enough, they brought in $19m in revenue for 2000 (which would increase 300% in 2001, and then 400% in 2002).
[1] 2013: https://slate.com/business/2013/10/googles-big-break-how-bil...
[2] 2005: https://www.gq.com/story/google-larry-sergey
> Schmidt met all of Larry and Sergey's stringent criteria. He had a credible name, a Ph.D. (from Berkeley), and he promised not to push the boys aside or dismantle the quirky culture they'd engendered. "The board members told me, basically, 'Don't screw this thing up!' " Schmidt says. "They said, 'It needs some infrastructure, some growing, but the gem here is very real.'"
Wow, that growth is absolutely insane even by startup standards.
Has there been another company since Google that grew so fast? $19mil revenue in 2yrs, then tripling and quadrupling.
Has there been another company since Google that grew so fast? $19mil revenue in 2yrs, then tripling and quadrupling.
When Groupon pivoted from The Point it grew insanely fast.
2008 - $0
2009 - $15 million
2010 - $313 Million
2011 - $1.6 Billion
Source: https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/GRPN/groupon/reven...
Source: https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/GRPN/groupon/reven...
I believe Uber's revenue grew at that pace.
Fastest company to reach $100m ARR [1]:
Slack - 3 years Twilio - ~5 years ServiceNow - 6 years Shopify - 7 years
[1] https://www.bvp.com/bvp-nasdaq-emerging-cloud-index
Slack - 3 years Twilio - ~5 years ServiceNow - 6 years Shopify - 7 years
[1] https://www.bvp.com/bvp-nasdaq-emerging-cloud-index
This list is saas companies. Its missing all consumer brands.
Compaq grew nearly as fast as some of those SaaS companies, and was engaged in design, manufacturing and sales of a complex technology product that actually had to work, not just buggy web software. IIRC, they reached $1B faster than any company ever at the time. SaaS and "sharing" economy (really skimming economy) apps are not sustainable, but then as it turned out, neither was Compaq, after they entered into a stupid mergers...
Apple, at least back then, used to hold the record for fastest entry into the Fortune 500. It took them seven years to get there (#411 their first year on the list, in 1983).
They had $583 million in sales for 1983. $1.5 billion in today's dollar. They hit basically $1b the next year, at $982 million for 1984 (in 1984 dollars). Inflation adjusted I'm guessing they hit the $1 billion mark at about six years in business.
I similarly recall that Compaq grew extremely fast. Dell's liftoff followed a similar trajectory (the start was a bit slower, due to how Michael Dell started the company).
They had $583 million in sales for 1983. $1.5 billion in today's dollar. They hit basically $1b the next year, at $982 million for 1984 (in 1984 dollars). Inflation adjusted I'm guessing they hit the $1 billion mark at about six years in business.
I similarly recall that Compaq grew extremely fast. Dell's liftoff followed a similar trajectory (the start was a bit slower, due to how Michael Dell started the company).
[deleted]
Nicholas Carr wrote in Los Angeles Review of Books:
Seeking to keep the true nature of its work from the public, it adopted what its CEO at the time, Eric Schmidt, called a “hiding strategy” — a kind of corporate omerta backed up by stringent nondisclosure agreements. Page and Brin further shielded themselves from outside oversight by establishing a stock structure that guaranteed their power could never be challenged, neither by investors nor by directors. As one Google executive quoted by Zuboff put it, “Larry [Page] opposed any path that would reveal our technological secrets or stir the privacy pot and endanger our ability to gather data.”
https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/thieves-of-experience-ho...
Seeking to keep the true nature of its work from the public, it adopted what its CEO at the time, Eric Schmidt, called a “hiding strategy” — a kind of corporate omerta backed up by stringent nondisclosure agreements. Page and Brin further shielded themselves from outside oversight by establishing a stock structure that guaranteed their power could never be challenged, neither by investors nor by directors. As one Google executive quoted by Zuboff put it, “Larry [Page] opposed any path that would reveal our technological secrets or stir the privacy pot and endanger our ability to gather data.”
https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/thieves-of-experience-ho...
> I suspect it was after they hired people that weren't engineers to help
For years, they required that all their hires could program, even those in completely unrelated roles.
For years, they required that all their hires could program, even those in completely unrelated roles.
I suppose this might explain why all google products have terrible UX, to this day. But it's not really an argument against non-technical co-founders. Steve Jobs was non-technical, I think it's safe to assume Woz's Apple would have been less successful.
But he definitely had a technical background (working at Atari) and he knew his way around a circuit (compared to people one could classify as non-technical)
[deleted]
In my opinion, 'business person' is not the right word.
You need someone who has the right network, and/or can network, and/or can comfortably network. While still contributing as a co-founder.
Usually extraverts are good at this. If you're an introvert, you could still do it, but chances are you spent most of your life avoiding and/or wanting to avoid other folks.
You need someone who has the right network, and/or can network, and/or can comfortably network. While still contributing as a co-founder.
Usually extraverts are good at this. If you're an introvert, you could still do it, but chances are you spent most of your life avoiding and/or wanting to avoid other folks.
You're forgetting Infoseek, which was a dramatically better search engine than anything else out there (including Google, Excite, and Yahoo), until it was bought by Disney/Go and was emasculated before finally being dumbed-down literally to the point of uselessness.
Unfortunately, founder-dating is the same as normal dating but probably even harder as the stakes are higher. It's very difficult to find same "motivation-level" people (how much do they "want" it, are they as "hungry" as you, etc.) and it is very hard to gauge with talk as you have to see their actions to really know and sometimes it may be too late. At the same time, there is also the "stage in life" (single, married, etc.) and how much can they risk (like a 45-yr old person may not be able to quit their high-paying job so you will carry the load and end up with a lot of resentment)
Since you work at a FAANG as an engineer, I assume you are fairly well compensated so I suggest finding a semi-expensive hobby (definitely not FIRE friendly) like sailing or flying which may cost like $1k/mo to something you remotely enjoy so you get to meet people from all walks of life and domain expertise enjoying a "not cheap" hobby. The fact that they can afford it means they are motivated. The person doing your hobby may not be the person you end up starting a business with but it may be one-step away (degrees of separation).
This may be bad advice ... so take with a grain of salt :)
Since you work at a FAANG as an engineer, I assume you are fairly well compensated so I suggest finding a semi-expensive hobby (definitely not FIRE friendly) like sailing or flying which may cost like $1k/mo to something you remotely enjoy so you get to meet people from all walks of life and domain expertise enjoying a "not cheap" hobby. The fact that they can afford it means they are motivated. The person doing your hobby may not be the person you end up starting a business with but it may be one-step away (degrees of separation).
This may be bad advice ... so take with a grain of salt :)
Basically, go hang with rich people. It’s probably not bad advice. I’m not entirely sure why but it makes me a bit sad to think about.
They can't be "too rich" where they are financially retired (they are not going to be in the same motivation level) but at least have some disposable income to engage in such an activity. It's a self-selecting network.
Why do people pay $150k to get an MBA at Harvard if you can pay $20k somewhere else and maybe get the EXACT same education? It's because you know 99% of the people there paid $150k and you have a "better" network.
Why do people pay $150k to get an MBA at Harvard if you can pay $20k somewhere else and maybe get the EXACT same education? It's because you know 99% of the people there paid $150k and you have a "better" network.
And yet we like to fool ourselves with ideas of a meritocracy.
I feel like spending 1000$ a month on sailing is not a great way to meet people from all walks of life. :(
> sailing is not a great way to meet people from all walks of life. :(
To be fair, they're looking for co-founders which may not require meeting people from all walks of life.
To be fair, they're looking for co-founders which may not require meeting people from all walks of life.
I’m a VC, so this take is biased. Liberally apply grains of salt.
If you are looking to start a VC-scale startup, I’d suggest talking to VCs who can help introduce you to domain experts. There are a few reasons this is beneficial:
- You get to battle test your idea to hone the story. This will help you recruit non-technical people.
- You build relationships with VC for the moment you need funding.
- You learn which VC are actually helpful. The meme is that all VC have to pitch how much value they add, but the reality is most can’t/won’t/don’t outside of MBA 101 platitudes.
- A great VC is always building out networks for BD and founder identification. You should leverage that to help in your space.
- Even if the idea doesnt pan out, if you prove yourself to be talented and hard working, they are incentivized to help you find a role relevant to your interests.
This is colored by my personal investing philosophy that you should prioritize meeting “makers”. Others prioritize meeting executives, or sources of capital, or influencers, etc... None is a “true” path, there are successes in each. But the ones focused on makers always want to chat with folks like you.
If you are looking to start a VC-scale startup, I’d suggest talking to VCs who can help introduce you to domain experts. There are a few reasons this is beneficial:
- You get to battle test your idea to hone the story. This will help you recruit non-technical people.
- You build relationships with VC for the moment you need funding.
- You learn which VC are actually helpful. The meme is that all VC have to pitch how much value they add, but the reality is most can’t/won’t/don’t outside of MBA 101 platitudes.
- A great VC is always building out networks for BD and founder identification. You should leverage that to help in your space.
- Even if the idea doesnt pan out, if you prove yourself to be talented and hard working, they are incentivized to help you find a role relevant to your interests.
This is colored by my personal investing philosophy that you should prioritize meeting “makers”. Others prioritize meeting executives, or sources of capital, or influencers, etc... None is a “true” path, there are successes in each. But the ones focused on makers always want to chat with folks like you.
I doubt you all reply to cold emails ? As someone who has no connections to the VC world, it does feel intimidating just writing a cold email. Then again - nothing to lose.
You'd be surprised. VCs will often respond to cold calls because part of their job is to cultivate connections with people who will be starting the Next Big Thing. The best way to do that is to get them into their rolodex before they get on anyone else's radar.
But be careful what you wish for. Getting the cold call response and even the first meeting is relatively easy. But it is also easy to exhibit a level of cluelessness that will get you blackballed, and if that happens you will probably never know it. So that first meeting can be very much a two-edged sword. You only get one chance to make a first impression.
But be careful what you wish for. Getting the cold call response and even the first meeting is relatively easy. But it is also easy to exhibit a level of cluelessness that will get you blackballed, and if that happens you will probably never know it. So that first meeting can be very much a two-edged sword. You only get one chance to make a first impression.
Why would you get blackballed for being clueless? Are founders suppose to come equipped with how to speak VC jargon? Aren’t VCs suppose to find unpolished talent with the ability to execute, invest and be a resource to make them successful?
Being clueless != not knowing the jargon. In fact, one of the most common forms of cluelessness is throwing jargon around in a misguided attempt to show that you know things that you actually don't. Being clueless means not knowing something that you really should have known, and that does not include jargon. I'll give you an example from my own experience: I had a meeting with a name-brand VC during which I levied some harsh criticism at a company that it turned out that they had invested in, indicating that I either didn't know they had invested in it or that I did know and was just being obnoxious. Either way, I was exhibiting cluelessness. One of the many things you are expected to know before talking to any VC is all the information on their web site: their portfolio companies, who the partners are, where they spent their careers, what their investment thesis is. Happily, that one mistake was not enough to actually get me blackballed throughout the industry, but I never had another meeting with anyone at that firm.
Really depends on the type of cold email. If an investment banker cold emails me with a “hot deal” I delete immediately. If a founder sends me a template email in a space I clearly dont invest, I delete. If a dev sends me an email with interesting insight or project and the ask is an easy to answer question, I’ll respond. Might go out of my way and chat if I’m impressed.
work out your product, buyer persona, business model, go to market, and tell a coherent story around these for why you will succeed and you will get replies.
the cold email contents will be a concise summary of the above.
the cold email contents will be a concise summary of the above.
Optimistically, he did just reply to a cold post :-)
There are numerous ways to approach the problem you're facing, but first of all it'd be good to understand the core problem you're running into. Unfortunately, without too many details this is all going to be a little abstract.
Based on the detail you've provided, it seems one problem you're facing is access to industry domain experts who can both validate what you're doing and also perhaps help you refine the product and market access.
If that is correct, I'd suggest that you don't, at this point, look for a non-technical co-founder but rather just approach people with domain expertise in the industry that you're trying to target for advice and validation by requesting a short conversation. LinkedIn can be a very good source and depending on how you approach the people and your own profile you may get a very good response from people. Anywhere above 20-30% response rate would be very good just to set expectations, it can be higher or lower but don't be disheartened.
Depending on the domain you're targeting there is a much much larger pool of people who will offer you initial advice than who will be willing to join as co-founder. Once you get connected and they accept, just talk to these people. Get input, and also ask for further connections, as in is there someone you should be speaking to that they can introduce you to. Use them in future when you're looking to make a sale or for early adoption and again, for advice.
This will kick start your journey and you will find people. If you find someone truly awesome and nice, who is also interested in what you're doing, you can ask them to be an advisor. If you find someone who is interested in joining, then perhaps have them join. But be careful, and make diligent decision before having people join the team.
Based on the detail you've provided, it seems one problem you're facing is access to industry domain experts who can both validate what you're doing and also perhaps help you refine the product and market access.
If that is correct, I'd suggest that you don't, at this point, look for a non-technical co-founder but rather just approach people with domain expertise in the industry that you're trying to target for advice and validation by requesting a short conversation. LinkedIn can be a very good source and depending on how you approach the people and your own profile you may get a very good response from people. Anywhere above 20-30% response rate would be very good just to set expectations, it can be higher or lower but don't be disheartened.
Depending on the domain you're targeting there is a much much larger pool of people who will offer you initial advice than who will be willing to join as co-founder. Once you get connected and they accept, just talk to these people. Get input, and also ask for further connections, as in is there someone you should be speaking to that they can introduce you to. Use them in future when you're looking to make a sale or for early adoption and again, for advice.
This will kick start your journey and you will find people. If you find someone truly awesome and nice, who is also interested in what you're doing, you can ask them to be an advisor. If you find someone who is interested in joining, then perhaps have them join. But be careful, and make diligent decision before having people join the team.
Hey, thanks for the very thoughtful response.
I realize now that my initial post may have implied otherwise, but I'm mostly looking to start establishing relationships that may lead to entrepreneurial collaboration in the future. I'm definitely not looking to jump straight into anything at the moment – it's not like there's a particular idea I'm in love with, and I'm naturally a very cautious person so I'd like to take the time to get to know people before starting a project with them.
My concern is moreso that it takes a lot of time and effort to build trust, and so I'd like to start meeting such people sooner rather than later.
I realize now that my initial post may have implied otherwise, but I'm mostly looking to start establishing relationships that may lead to entrepreneurial collaboration in the future. I'm definitely not looking to jump straight into anything at the moment – it's not like there's a particular idea I'm in love with, and I'm naturally a very cautious person so I'd like to take the time to get to know people before starting a project with them.
My concern is moreso that it takes a lot of time and effort to build trust, and so I'd like to start meeting such people sooner rather than later.
You're welcome and welcome to entrepreneurship. :)
Another option, often not considered, depending on where you are in your career is to join a very early stage startup that is doing something in your domain, for 1-2 years.
This may or may not be an option for you depending on your own factors, but that is a good option as it helps people migrate from the large company mindset to a startup mindset. Also, it helps extend your network with the right kind of people that may help when you go on your own.
Another option, often not considered, depending on where you are in your career is to join a very early stage startup that is doing something in your domain, for 1-2 years.
This may or may not be an option for you depending on your own factors, but that is a good option as it helps people migrate from the large company mindset to a startup mindset. Also, it helps extend your network with the right kind of people that may help when you go on your own.
I’d recommend joining an existing, early stage startup in the same/similar niche you eventually want to build your own product in. While there, make an effort to network with the non-technical staff.
Not only will you learn a ton about shipping product in a startup (risking someone else’s money), but you will also grow your own network - including non-technical founder types.
This model worked for me. I spent twelve years with the US federal government. I had great tech and business skills, but it was all federally focused.
I joined the founding team of a startup, using my tech background. We got acquired 15 months in by a later stage startup. The resulting company IPO’d four years later. I joined another startup in the same industry as CTO just after their Series A, we got acquired two years later. Then I launched my own - 8 years after leaving the federal government.
It is a ton easier now, with all the relationships from the last two. (Not to mention the depth of knowledge on everything)
It is easy to think startups are all about the product & technology. But it is so much more!
Not only will you learn a ton about shipping product in a startup (risking someone else’s money), but you will also grow your own network - including non-technical founder types.
This model worked for me. I spent twelve years with the US federal government. I had great tech and business skills, but it was all federally focused.
I joined the founding team of a startup, using my tech background. We got acquired 15 months in by a later stage startup. The resulting company IPO’d four years later. I joined another startup in the same industry as CTO just after their Series A, we got acquired two years later. Then I launched my own - 8 years after leaving the federal government.
It is a ton easier now, with all the relationships from the last two. (Not to mention the depth of knowledge on everything)
It is easy to think startups are all about the product & technology. But it is so much more!
A variation of this was posted above and I want to repeat: not always a great idea as it is easy to end up not having deep engagement with other business functions. It becomes heavily dependent on finding the right team.
Good options for maximizing your network 1) stay with a Faang and reach out to people internally - many of the best non tech people are inside Amazon, FB etc 2) consider consulting that blends you with larger teams or different functions, either with a company or freelancing.
Good options for maximizing your network 1) stay with a Faang and reach out to people internally - many of the best non tech people are inside Amazon, FB etc 2) consider consulting that blends you with larger teams or different functions, either with a company or freelancing.
I wouldn't co-found with a business person (whatever that means). You need as many people as possible who actually make the product (developers and designers), and someone who is passionate about solving problems in a particular domain and talking to customers (a product manager). Sometimes these roles are just one person, sometimes two or three. Sales & marketing can be handled by the same team or hired for. You can hire sales people with existing networks if that is needed. I think that if one person can handle all of these roles, he should.
1. I don't think finding a qualified "business" person will be excessively difficult. From my experience, there is an under-supply of engineers and an over-supply of business people wanting to found. Thus, if you are an engineer from a FAANG company, there should be large demand for your skillset by business people looking to found. That being said, the main ways to find non-technical co-founders is via network (your FAANG friends are bound to know someone, ask them for an introduction) and events. Also, don't be afraid to cold reachout to someone who might be interesting.
2. Be sure you want a "business" person in your founding team. Many great companies made it without one. If you need very deep domain knowledge then yes, it can be beneficial to have such a person. However, that being said, if you don't have knowledge in that domain you should also not really be looking to found in that domain. However, that is besides the point. Many "business" skills like sales, marketing and fundraising can be learned to a good enough standard by most technical cofounders. I have always has bad experience taking on non-techincal co-founders to handle the "business" part.
Just to make this clear, I do not think "business" co-founders are useless. There are a lot of very good ones that bring a lot of value. All I am saying is that I have made bad experiences taking in "business" people to handle the "business" part of the startup. Most of the time you can (and should) learn the necessary skills yourself. Every startup needs technical co-founders, however most startups don't NEED non-technical co-founders.
Just to make this clear, I do not think "business" co-founders are useless. There are a lot of very good ones that bring a lot of value. All I am saying is that I have made bad experiences taking in "business" people to handle the "business" part of the startup. Most of the time you can (and should) learn the necessary skills yourself. Every startup needs technical co-founders, however most startups don't NEED non-technical co-founders.
I think there is a huge difference between the “business” taught at university and the “business” skills you need to launch a new venture.
In my experience, formal education tends to be very corporate-operations focused because that’s where most grads go. Most courses presuppose that the company has already found product-market fit - using these same behaviours in a new venture context could be dangerous.
Ideally, you’d find someone who recognises this difference and works to learn the differences between the environments, and brings the best of both worlds to the venture.
In my experience, formal education tends to be very corporate-operations focused because that’s where most grads go. Most courses presuppose that the company has already found product-market fit - using these same behaviours in a new venture context could be dangerous.
Ideally, you’d find someone who recognises this difference and works to learn the differences between the environments, and brings the best of both worlds to the venture.
It is important to work with someone that you can trust. Someone that can push through hell together with you and not abandon everything at the smallest bump. It takes a strong character, ambition and sense of urgency. When it comes to non-technical / business people, it might be counter-intuitive, but having attended a good university or having worked for a good company can indicate high intelligence and not entrepreneurial drive. This being said, you can still collaborate with technical people that are comfortable with selling the vision, product and services, can hustle and are reliable.
Also, be careful of non-compete agreements by joining other start-ups.
There are several ways in which you can find good co-founders:
1. Don’t prioritise finding a co-founders, just start building something and reach out to people. They might love what you’re doing and come on-board.
2. Get recommendations via your network about people who want to build a company and have complementary skills / similar goals.
3. Increase your visibility, publish your thoughts, network and debate about the future - randomness / serendipity is a wondrous force
4. Accelerators such as Antler and EF - as a last resort.
I’m also looking for smart, relentless people that want to build a better future for generations to come. Don’t hesitate to reach out via linkedin - username: tudordragos
Also, be careful of non-compete agreements by joining other start-ups.
There are several ways in which you can find good co-founders:
1. Don’t prioritise finding a co-founders, just start building something and reach out to people. They might love what you’re doing and come on-board.
2. Get recommendations via your network about people who want to build a company and have complementary skills / similar goals.
3. Increase your visibility, publish your thoughts, network and debate about the future - randomness / serendipity is a wondrous force
4. Accelerators such as Antler and EF - as a last resort.
I’m also looking for smart, relentless people that want to build a better future for generations to come. Don’t hesitate to reach out via linkedin - username: tudordragos
^^THIS! Trust is THE most important factor. Treat this like finding someone to marry, because (sadly) there's a decent chance your startup could outlast your marriage. (Pay attention to that, BTW! Your family is really important, and unless you've already made a huge mistake, no company is worth losing them over.) Any good/honest partner will be willing to tie equity to milestones - never just toss a big chunk of equity to your CEO/cofounder just because others are stupid enough to do that. (Keep in mind the dictum that in most all startup cos., your equity is simultaneously worthless and the only thing of value the company has, other than your team which is usually there because of the potential for equity. As soon as you're funded, pay people fairly - not top of scale, but enough to keep them happy and loving the job.)
And yes, FWIW, I've been on (and been burned on) both sides of these deals, both as a CTO looking for a good CEO to raise money and get us to market (lost my a$$) and as a contract CEO hired to get a company off the ground. The ONLY thing that matters is the people themselves, and more importantly, their character, trustworthiness, and insistence on being fully upright in all things.
It's much harder to find these people than you might think, and it can be really hard to get rid of a bad one if you screw up. (As the Russians say, "Doveryai, no proveryai - Trust, but verify!")
It's much harder to find these people than you might think, and it can be really hard to get rid of a bad one if you screw up. (As the Russians say, "Doveryai, no proveryai - Trust, but verify!")
Honestly my advice would be to leave FAANG and join an early stage startup ... you're much more likely to meet a wider array of people with similar passions and interests and varied skillsets.
Even if that startup itself fails you are likely to meet people you could start another company with and if it succeeds it will be an even better place to start a company from when leaving, most exceptional founders love to support their employees leaving to start something new.
Even if that startup itself fails you are likely to meet people you could start another company with and if it succeeds it will be an even better place to start a company from when leaving, most exceptional founders love to support their employees leaving to start something new.
Respectfully this is awful advice, as someone who’s worked at FAANG and early stage startups. The idea that working for early stage startups will help you start your own is a myth propagated intentionally by founders/VCs to recruit SWEs with lowball offers.
FAANG is actually way better to meet cofounders. At Google you can have lunch with a talented person every day (there’s internal apps to network like this), plus countless other opportunities to network both formally and informally.
In contrast, at an early stage startup you’ll mostly work with the same people every day and your network will stagnate.
Furthermore, early stage startups tend to have a ton of work that needs to be done that they hire there engineers to do. Unless you get CTO title, you’re probably not going to get exposed much to the BD side or get investor access.
Finally, being able to work full time on your startup to get demo ready to pitch is super helpful. A nest egg from FAANG RSUs is key here, startup ISOs are probably worth nothing and will reduce your cushioning.
If you want to do a startup, go to networking events, apply to YC, etc but leaving FAANG to be an early stage employee w goal, not closer, especially if you don’t at least get CTO title.
FAANG is actually way better to meet cofounders. At Google you can have lunch with a talented person every day (there’s internal apps to network like this), plus countless other opportunities to network both formally and informally.
In contrast, at an early stage startup you’ll mostly work with the same people every day and your network will stagnate.
Furthermore, early stage startups tend to have a ton of work that needs to be done that they hire there engineers to do. Unless you get CTO title, you’re probably not going to get exposed much to the BD side or get investor access.
Finally, being able to work full time on your startup to get demo ready to pitch is super helpful. A nest egg from FAANG RSUs is key here, startup ISOs are probably worth nothing and will reduce your cushioning.
If you want to do a startup, go to networking events, apply to YC, etc but leaving FAANG to be an early stage employee w goal, not closer, especially if you don’t at least get CTO title.
I have to agree that this advice is awful too, unfortunately.
As an engineer for an early-stage startup you daily work and value add - shipping things and invest into deep engineering work, would not be very well aligned with networking and relationship building that would be beneficial to start on your own.
Another interesting idea to consider - as a FAANG engineer you would be able to angel invest already (or fairly soon). That would be a productive (quite expensive though) way to meet more people interested in the same things as you do.
As an engineer for an early-stage startup you daily work and value add - shipping things and invest into deep engineering work, would not be very well aligned with networking and relationship building that would be beneficial to start on your own.
Another interesting idea to consider - as a FAANG engineer you would be able to angel invest already (or fairly soon). That would be a productive (quite expensive though) way to meet more people interested in the same things as you do.
I agree it is awful advice. Early stage startup will be similar to FAANG except a lot more work and much less compensation.
YMMV. I've been in the same FAANG-to-early-stage position, and I found:
1. It was easy to find people interested in startups at Google, but the quality of those interactions tended to be pretty low. The vast majority of people really did not have any experience with how startups actually functioned, and most people I talked to were more taken with the prestige and fantasy of being a founder than with actually seriously thinking about running a startup. I'm sure there are great and experienced operators at Google who are very competent and pragmatic startup folks - but those were generally not the people you found at internal events geared towards "people interested in startups".
2. I learned a lot cross-functionally when I joined my current team (which was < 5 people at the time). I was talking to customers in sales and support calls, helping to think about product and market strategy, and generally helping out on a variety of interesting things. You're definitely right that I wasn't talking to investors (at least, not on a regular basis - as an early employee, sometimes investors still want to chat to learn more about how things are on the ground) nor was I spending my days prospecting and finding BD partnerships, but I did learn a surprising amount about deal dynamics, selling B2B, and thinking about markets and customers in general. That said, this may have been because of the extraordinarily open and competent sales folks I worked with.
When I look on my list of "people I would co-found with", the vast majority of those people are the incredibly intense and competent folks I met working at the (now no longer early stage) startup I moved to. In general, I think about finding a co-founder less as "cast a wide net to find your one true partner" and more as "work alongside the most aggressively competent people you can find, and hopefully some of those people will mesh with you well enough that you would consider co-founding with them" (with the corollary that, if you find yourself in a job where you feel like you're mostly coasting, this is probably not a good environment for finding co-founders (although it certainly may be a good environment for you for other reasons)).
As usual, grain of salt - I was basically a new grad when I joined Google, and I expect the experience would be very different if I had a strong, senior network there. I also come from a position of unusual privilege - my parents are both engineers and I have lots of friends in engineering and I'm good at what I do, so I am unusually risk tolerant because "running out of money" or "being unable to easily find a job" is just not a thing I worry about.
1. It was easy to find people interested in startups at Google, but the quality of those interactions tended to be pretty low. The vast majority of people really did not have any experience with how startups actually functioned, and most people I talked to were more taken with the prestige and fantasy of being a founder than with actually seriously thinking about running a startup. I'm sure there are great and experienced operators at Google who are very competent and pragmatic startup folks - but those were generally not the people you found at internal events geared towards "people interested in startups".
2. I learned a lot cross-functionally when I joined my current team (which was < 5 people at the time). I was talking to customers in sales and support calls, helping to think about product and market strategy, and generally helping out on a variety of interesting things. You're definitely right that I wasn't talking to investors (at least, not on a regular basis - as an early employee, sometimes investors still want to chat to learn more about how things are on the ground) nor was I spending my days prospecting and finding BD partnerships, but I did learn a surprising amount about deal dynamics, selling B2B, and thinking about markets and customers in general. That said, this may have been because of the extraordinarily open and competent sales folks I worked with.
When I look on my list of "people I would co-found with", the vast majority of those people are the incredibly intense and competent folks I met working at the (now no longer early stage) startup I moved to. In general, I think about finding a co-founder less as "cast a wide net to find your one true partner" and more as "work alongside the most aggressively competent people you can find, and hopefully some of those people will mesh with you well enough that you would consider co-founding with them" (with the corollary that, if you find yourself in a job where you feel like you're mostly coasting, this is probably not a good environment for finding co-founders (although it certainly may be a good environment for you for other reasons)).
As usual, grain of salt - I was basically a new grad when I joined Google, and I expect the experience would be very different if I had a strong, senior network there. I also come from a position of unusual privilege - my parents are both engineers and I have lots of friends in engineering and I'm good at what I do, so I am unusually risk tolerant because "running out of money" or "being unable to easily find a job" is just not a thing I worry about.
I have to agree with ditonal. Going from a FAANG company to a startup for anything less than a CTO role is a bad idea. I know this because I did this. While it all worked out in the end (I wanted to move to Los Angeles to do heavy metal stuff with my heavy metal friends anyway) there's definitely a hard ceiling at a startup.
Stay at the cushy high paying job and network on nights and weekends. Even better, make a point to ask a person out to lunch every week at the FAANG job once the pandemic is over.
"Networking" for me has just been hanging out with my music and YouTuber buddies. Turns out if you know how to SPELL PHP or HTML you can provide HUGE value to non-technical friends. Doing something as simple as fixing a typo in some JavaScript tracking code for friend's websites makes me look like I've shown them fire for the first time. Find a hobby you like that's non-technical (for me it's learning Chinese, salsa dancing, and metal), show up, have a good time, and within a year or two you'll have a high quality network of non-technical partners.
Stay at the cushy high paying job and network on nights and weekends. Even better, make a point to ask a person out to lunch every week at the FAANG job once the pandemic is over.
"Networking" for me has just been hanging out with my music and YouTuber buddies. Turns out if you know how to SPELL PHP or HTML you can provide HUGE value to non-technical friends. Doing something as simple as fixing a typo in some JavaScript tracking code for friend's websites makes me look like I've shown them fire for the first time. Find a hobby you like that's non-technical (for me it's learning Chinese, salsa dancing, and metal), show up, have a good time, and within a year or two you'll have a high quality network of non-technical partners.
There's one way and one way only: former coworkers. That's the only good option. Someone you've worked with. And not just someone you liked... someone you admire.
That being said, all high-impact jobs at a startup are technical at first and then slowly shifts to nontechnical. So early on, your non-technical cofounder will be bored and not have much to do. And as time goes on, assuming they are still around, that will shift.
Consider instead going with two technical founders, and assume one or both of you will end up shifting into a more operational role.
That being said, all high-impact jobs at a startup are technical at first and then slowly shifts to nontechnical. So early on, your non-technical cofounder will be bored and not have much to do. And as time goes on, assuming they are still around, that will shift.
Consider instead going with two technical founders, and assume one or both of you will end up shifting into a more operational role.
This is a semi serious answer but...
If we were not in the middle of COVID I would say to take a trip to Atlanta. In the Atlanta startup community there is no shortage of MBA and marketing types with lots of ideas that are just looking for a developer who is willing to work for next to nothing and equity that is much smaller than it should be.
Of course all of these business types will tell you about how they are the tech visionaries. They dominate most of the big startup events in that town that are supposed to be tech focused and will write countless marketing pieces telling you why their next co-working space makes Atlanta the "Silicon Valley of the East". In reality, a former tech reporter for the Atlanta Business Chronicle more accurately called Atlanta the Bangalore of the South since many larger tech groups will open offices here to try to reduce costs.
Don't get me wrong with Atlanta, it is a great place to live from a standpoint of having a lower cost of living compared with what you can get for a salary, especially if you are able to work for a west coast company that pays well. There are also other cities with a similar dynamic.
My point is that there are many ways to find it, but be careful because you may be trading one set of problems for another.
If we were not in the middle of COVID I would say to take a trip to Atlanta. In the Atlanta startup community there is no shortage of MBA and marketing types with lots of ideas that are just looking for a developer who is willing to work for next to nothing and equity that is much smaller than it should be.
Of course all of these business types will tell you about how they are the tech visionaries. They dominate most of the big startup events in that town that are supposed to be tech focused and will write countless marketing pieces telling you why their next co-working space makes Atlanta the "Silicon Valley of the East". In reality, a former tech reporter for the Atlanta Business Chronicle more accurately called Atlanta the Bangalore of the South since many larger tech groups will open offices here to try to reduce costs.
Don't get me wrong with Atlanta, it is a great place to live from a standpoint of having a lower cost of living compared with what you can get for a salary, especially if you are able to work for a west coast company that pays well. There are also other cities with a similar dynamic.
My point is that there are many ways to find it, but be careful because you may be trading one set of problems for another.
FWIW, though I love and grew up in Austin, it an extremely dysfunctional startup/VC community, so unless you just have to have the cool factor, find almost anyplace else to start your company - real estate will be lots cheaper, too, and you might even have a functioning city government. As I said, I love it here, but will be leaving before too much longer, as it's going all the wrong ways, esp. w.r.t. startup culture.
The non-technical entrepreneur-MBA types tend to over-value their business "ideas" and want 2/3 of the company. Because it was "their idea". Be careful.
We have helped a number of teams form at the Bootstrapper Breakfast over the last fourteen years. You are welcome to join us, here is a schedule of meetings in September: https://bootstrappersbreakfast.com/2020/08/25/roundup-of-eve... You can also see a list of meetings on eventbrite: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/silicon-valley-bootstrapper-bre...
I would NOT quit your day job until you have a clear direction and a reasonable certainly of progress. Treat your current employer as a passive investor in your next venture.
Here is a pointer to the first blog post in a series that provides some practical advice on how to find cofounders: https://www.skmurphy.com/blog/2010/06/25/finding-a-co-founde...
I would NOT quit your day job until you have a clear direction and a reasonable certainly of progress. Treat your current employer as a passive investor in your next venture.
Here is a pointer to the first blog post in a series that provides some practical advice on how to find cofounders: https://www.skmurphy.com/blog/2010/06/25/finding-a-co-founde...
right here on hn is / has the potential to be an ideal recruiting ground for non technical entrepreneurs.
i mean, what you're essentially looking for is the intellectual equivalent of a bar, or more conveniently, the halls of residence in a good university.
the reason universities are so ideal for finding cofounders is that perfect blend of infinite trajectory (minimal real world obligations) and equal standing. ideally, the place you're talking about has the capacity to integrate these things into a social sphere, without the media.
hn can fulfil this role more or less, and could do so to a greater extent if they had the incentive to. you have the karma / profile to judge someone's character and understanding, and their further contact if that's what they want.
it so happens that all of the job postings are for technical positions, but that is due to the fact that it is more likely for someone nontechnical to need an engineer than the other way around.
where else would the millennial steve jobs be lurking? (this is not exclusively rhetoric – if there is another answer that's not hn then go there)
if they're nowhere obvious, then they're hustling, and good luck finding them if you didn't go to school with them.
i mean, what you're essentially looking for is the intellectual equivalent of a bar, or more conveniently, the halls of residence in a good university.
the reason universities are so ideal for finding cofounders is that perfect blend of infinite trajectory (minimal real world obligations) and equal standing. ideally, the place you're talking about has the capacity to integrate these things into a social sphere, without the media.
hn can fulfil this role more or less, and could do so to a greater extent if they had the incentive to. you have the karma / profile to judge someone's character and understanding, and their further contact if that's what they want.
it so happens that all of the job postings are for technical positions, but that is due to the fact that it is more likely for someone nontechnical to need an engineer than the other way around.
where else would the millennial steve jobs be lurking? (this is not exclusively rhetoric – if there is another answer that's not hn then go there)
if they're nowhere obvious, then they're hustling, and good luck finding them if you didn't go to school with them.
Non-tech founders are more abundant, but usually outside your circles. You'll probably want two types: someone who can handle business/funding/sales, and someone who can focus on the product. More people have finance degrees than tech ones, and there's a lot of people who are domain experts.
A good bet is someone who has their soul into the product. Someone who sincerely understands the pain point and works at it. If you're doing something for ships, you probably want to find someone who works within the ship industry. Spotify wasn't founded by music producers, but it was founded by people who were passionate about music streaming.
A good bet is someone who has their soul into the product. Someone who sincerely understands the pain point and works at it. If you're doing something for ships, you probably want to find someone who works within the ship industry. Spotify wasn't founded by music producers, but it was founded by people who were passionate about music streaming.
Why don't you learn some business skills yourself? The materials are available on internet. Sure it takes time.
You want to learn digital marketing? There are many good tutorials on Youtube or you can buy some digital marketing books.
If you took this path, you would reach the state on which you may not need a business co-founder anymore. If you met a good business co-founder, at least, you could gauge whether they are competent or not using your business skills.
Some good materials for you to start learning business skills:
Digital marketing: https://www.youtube.com/user/neilvkpatel
Corporate finance: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUl4u3cNGP63B2lDhyKOs...
Supply chain: https://www.coursera.org/specializations/supply-chain-manage...
HR: https://www.coursera.org/specializations/human-resource-mana...
Of course, YC Startup Library is a top-notch resource: https://www.ycombinator.com/library
About networking in Covid-19.... Actually it's still possible. You could join some online communities. You could build your brand on social media (Linkedin, Twitter, etc). For example, if I wanted to network with some influential people on blockchain space, I would follow their Twitter and contribute to the conversation (Twitter threads), I would join an opensource blockchain project and build some connections with the core developers. You get the idea.
Good luck!
You want to learn digital marketing? There are many good tutorials on Youtube or you can buy some digital marketing books.
If you took this path, you would reach the state on which you may not need a business co-founder anymore. If you met a good business co-founder, at least, you could gauge whether they are competent or not using your business skills.
Some good materials for you to start learning business skills:
Digital marketing: https://www.youtube.com/user/neilvkpatel
Corporate finance: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUl4u3cNGP63B2lDhyKOs...
Supply chain: https://www.coursera.org/specializations/supply-chain-manage...
HR: https://www.coursera.org/specializations/human-resource-mana...
Of course, YC Startup Library is a top-notch resource: https://www.ycombinator.com/library
About networking in Covid-19.... Actually it's still possible. You could join some online communities. You could build your brand on social media (Linkedin, Twitter, etc). For example, if I wanted to network with some influential people on blockchain space, I would follow their Twitter and contribute to the conversation (Twitter threads), I would join an opensource blockchain project and build some connections with the core developers. You get the idea.
Good luck!
Everyone should learn the basics of business, but people have different talents and if you're born an engineer chances are you'll never be a very good salesman, and vice versa. Much better to focus on what you enjoy and do best, and find a business guy to focus on that part.
Obviously, if you are both well rounded and have some understanding of the other's area that will make things more efficient but don't try to BE the other.
Obviously, if you are both well rounded and have some understanding of the other's area that will make things more efficient but don't try to BE the other.
It's nice when you have friends that have the same goals/aspirations. For the rest of us, I suspect the best you can do is to put a lot of effort into searching for someone compatible via a combination of cold outreach, friends of friends, etc. -- being as vocal as possible. (On the other hand, don't let it be your excuse for why something isn't taking off.)
I would take my products, show them to as many people as possible, and find out who is interested. While engaging with those people, explain to them your situation and that you're looking for some help. Try to leverage your potential users' networks. (Just my 2 cents.)
All that aside -- I'd be interested in chatting about what you're working on and seeing if we might collaborate in the future. Feel free to reach out: [email protected]
I would take my products, show them to as many people as possible, and find out who is interested. While engaging with those people, explain to them your situation and that you're looking for some help. Try to leverage your potential users' networks. (Just my 2 cents.)
All that aside -- I'd be interested in chatting about what you're working on and seeing if we might collaborate in the future. Feel free to reach out: [email protected]
As the solo founder of a profitable $1MM ARR company I'd say you can do it on your own and there's nothing they can add anyway. Just pick a domain you're deeply obsessed with in the first place.
Remember, in software in 2020 the only important thing is distribution. Work backwards from distribution. The biggest SaaS products aren't that great, they just have a great way to get sales/leads. The best consumer products, aren't that great (or weren't that great) - they just found an hack. 99.9% of startups thinks they need to make a great product and then raise VC and throw millions on FB and G ads -being highly unprofitable- (since PPC is a game for established deep-pocket companies with ridiculous CACs)
Literally just hacks: Airbnb, spamming Craiglist. Dropbox, referral incentive-based storage + a viral funny video for hackers. Stripe, they happened to be in an early YC batch. Facebook started with the most exclusive place in the world: Harvard. Hotmail: adding "sent with hotmail" at the end of the email. etc.
If you find a way to for ex. post on Facebook Groups at scale, then you should work a product backward from there since not all channels are suited for all products. If you have many friends in the intel community, probably you should make a product for the US Defense. Get the gist?
in 2020 any decent dev can create any product and/or copy your idea. what's impossible is getting tons of customers at a reasonable acquisition cost as to be profitable and have to spare to re-invest in growth.
Hardware/scientific breakthroughs are obviously different. Making the product is h hard part and distribution is easy: if you inventhe the transistor, the customers will be there.
so yeah a sales cofounder will add nothing as he wont happen to know which temporary weird thing on the internet allows in a very specific way to get a ton of customers at a very cheap price (ideally free). If he did, he would hire anyone in the world as a contractor to build a prototype and distribute it through the hack he found- 99% of the work is already done when you found the well. If you'll attempt to methodically find a well (usually one just stumbles upon it), know that before you'll find find 1 you'll have to go thru 100+ dry wells.
The alternative I guess is you could make software for a super niche kind of business. like Insurance. Software for insurance agents. Maybe an even more narrow niche. That's because you can reach these people via phone or email. which is free.
Remember, in software in 2020 the only important thing is distribution. Work backwards from distribution. The biggest SaaS products aren't that great, they just have a great way to get sales/leads. The best consumer products, aren't that great (or weren't that great) - they just found an hack. 99.9% of startups thinks they need to make a great product and then raise VC and throw millions on FB and G ads -being highly unprofitable- (since PPC is a game for established deep-pocket companies with ridiculous CACs)
Literally just hacks: Airbnb, spamming Craiglist. Dropbox, referral incentive-based storage + a viral funny video for hackers. Stripe, they happened to be in an early YC batch. Facebook started with the most exclusive place in the world: Harvard. Hotmail: adding "sent with hotmail" at the end of the email. etc.
If you find a way to for ex. post on Facebook Groups at scale, then you should work a product backward from there since not all channels are suited for all products. If you have many friends in the intel community, probably you should make a product for the US Defense. Get the gist?
in 2020 any decent dev can create any product and/or copy your idea. what's impossible is getting tons of customers at a reasonable acquisition cost as to be profitable and have to spare to re-invest in growth.
Hardware/scientific breakthroughs are obviously different. Making the product is h hard part and distribution is easy: if you inventhe the transistor, the customers will be there.
so yeah a sales cofounder will add nothing as he wont happen to know which temporary weird thing on the internet allows in a very specific way to get a ton of customers at a very cheap price (ideally free). If he did, he would hire anyone in the world as a contractor to build a prototype and distribute it through the hack he found- 99% of the work is already done when you found the well. If you'll attempt to methodically find a well (usually one just stumbles upon it), know that before you'll find find 1 you'll have to go thru 100+ dry wells.
The alternative I guess is you could make software for a super niche kind of business. like Insurance. Software for insurance agents. Maybe an even more narrow niche. That's because you can reach these people via phone or email. which is free.
> I'm finding it quite unfulfilling
Leaving your job is going to be a very expensive mistake. If this is your motivation, your personal lack of fulfillment is going to be the #1 obstacle to recruiting others. This would be true of a cultural or non-profit enterprise too, and you underestimate how much recruiting by people who are chasing fulfillment in their lives boils down to, "And here's a bunch of dad's money" - those are the people you are competing with in terms of recruiting people into your thing, and those rich kids are going to do it better than you.
My suggestion is to only pursue something that you can do exclusively by yourself. That is the only takeaway. Or don't do this at all.
Leaving your job is going to be a very expensive mistake. If this is your motivation, your personal lack of fulfillment is going to be the #1 obstacle to recruiting others. This would be true of a cultural or non-profit enterprise too, and you underestimate how much recruiting by people who are chasing fulfillment in their lives boils down to, "And here's a bunch of dad's money" - those are the people you are competing with in terms of recruiting people into your thing, and those rich kids are going to do it better than you.
My suggestion is to only pursue something that you can do exclusively by yourself. That is the only takeaway. Or don't do this at all.
[deleted]
Interesting, I wonder why they don't have a US presence.
Offer free technical reviews, delivered by video call, for business pitch/plans written by founders who are looking for a technical co-founder.
Either you recruit them to your idea, or they recruit you to theirs.
In the best case, you will jointly come up with a new idea.
Either you recruit them to your idea, or they recruit you to theirs.
In the best case, you will jointly come up with a new idea.
I think you need to go to a smaller company not a startup necessarily. Go to a company that has PMF, working on scaling but the org size is still small to have meaningful relationships. Also you should be able to see your work directly impacting to your customers. People in other orgs are coming to you or your immediate team to discuss rollout/customer issues etc. Avoid companies with too many levels in the hierarchy.
Assuming you're in your 20s or early 30s, I recommend going to a place run by experienced people who can mentor you. I'm beyond that age range, but still have a boss who is experienced and teaches me something everyday.
Assuming you're in your 20s or early 30s, I recommend going to a place run by experienced people who can mentor you. I'm beyond that age range, but still have a boss who is experienced and teaches me something everyday.
https://indiehackers.com has local communities around the world and online forums for discussing technical and non-technical startup processes
There's even a group: https://www.indiehackers.com/group/looking-to-partner-up
In my experience Indie Hackers has an unusually high concentration of people who get things done, the kind of people with grit who you might want to partner with.
In my experience Indie Hackers has an unusually high concentration of people who get things done, the kind of people with grit who you might want to partner with.
I am non-technical (strategy consultant, worked in biz Dev, led scrum teams in implementation programs, program management, implemand now work with Faangs as clients). Would love to connect to future founders and others interested in my skillset, but felt like most people around HN are looking for good SWEs, and never see any postings or even discussions that fit my experienced. Would be awesome to have a regular post where non technical folks can stick their hands up for roles, discussion, to make connections etc.
As a successful startup founder I see both sides of the table, the problem for business founders seem to be that they literally have no idea what a good technical founder looks like often signing up junior devs as cofounders.
Then I see great devs and tech leads that wonder how to break into engineering management or CTO of a credible startup because all they see is random people with no clue pitching them.
Reach out to me and if you're a solid engineer I'll find you a solid business partner. (email in profile)
Then I see great devs and tech leads that wonder how to break into engineering management or CTO of a credible startup because all they see is random people with no clue pitching them.
Reach out to me and if you're a solid engineer I'll find you a solid business partner. (email in profile)
You can learn a lot of these things yourself and if your into bootstrapping you can do it solo for a long time. It’ll be more work and take longer for sure.
I would suggest getting on twitter and communities like indie hackers. People share how they’re getting users, they’re first customers, marketing tactics etc
As you consume more of this information and hack on your own projects you’ll develop a playbook for how to do it yourself.
Good luck.
I would suggest getting on twitter and communities like indie hackers. People share how they’re getting users, they’re first customers, marketing tactics etc
As you consume more of this information and hack on your own projects you’ll develop a playbook for how to do it yourself.
Good luck.
As an engineer who later did an MBA, I found b-school to be a great melting pot for people from different backgrounds. Granted your situation is different, but your uni might be a great place. Depending on what you mean by "non-technical", you might want to seek out alumni who are successful salespeople or marketers etc. Good luck!
An additional perspective, Carol Chen had an interesting post and thoughts about her ups and downs of being a co-founder / founder
https://carolchen.me/blog/founding-bad/
https://carolchen.me/blog/founding-bad/
Send me an email (<username> at gmail), would love to connect! I was in the same situation but found two non-technical cofounders. Now I'm the only technical person on the team, but it's at least great working with others. Much less lonely than working alone.
Kind of relevant to the topic, but I am unable to find a technical co-founder to work with me on my pet project that might or might not take off. I am a software developer but it is a two man job, because I lack knowledge on mobile department.
Any ideas?
Any ideas?
I am always open to new ideas and if it sounds like a good one I can get onboard
For context: I am a software engineer and angel investor that specializes in early stage exits. I have built and exited multiple startups together with a bunch of wonderful people over the years.
The problem you are describing is not unique in any way, shape or form. I coach dozens of startups every year and your problem is more common than you might think. When I first started, I was just like you. I had no one to turn to and I felt like I could get nowhere. Meetups and networking events were and still are a waste of time for the most part as you don’t really want to get into business with people you´ve only met for 2 hours and know very little about on a personal level. So where does that leave you?
1) You don’t need a non-technical person: Find a technical co-founder who has transitioned into management or have some sense of how to run a business and have said person be in charge of the duties that you don’t excel at. The reason I usually make this recommendation to people in your position is that most non-technical people tend to have a problem communicating with their technical counter-part because they don´t understand the technical challenges ahead the same way you do. It leads to resentment and hostility when communication breaks down. This is one of the most common reasons startups fail. Communication is key in team building.
2) Keep working on your product and ignore all the fluff: Put your head down and grind an MVP out before worrying about any of the other stuff. We can all pump out ideas by the hundreds, but execution is really what matters at the end of the day. Building an MVP most often does not require a co-founder. It just requires you to spend some of your free time building things. Do what you can for now (if you are serious about this) and stop worrying about “expansion plans”, “go to market strategies” and “networks”.
2) Get a couple of advisors that you can trust: Ask those who have gone through this whole thing before and let them mentor you. A lot of times people connect via their advisors´ networks and that usually ends up being a lot more successful of a partnership. This is because any person your advisor is going to suggest you partner up with in some capacity will have been screened/filtered by said advisor. I connect people at least a dozen times a year that I think would be great fit for each other, and that ends up working a lot better than finding people via networking events. The key here is to find advisors that are honest and want what is in your best interest.
3) Utilize capital properly: If you have an MVP for an idea that is worth its salt, finding capital these days is extremely easy. In fact, it is so easy that people raise absurd amounts because capital is competing for deals. There is a lot more money out there than there are good companies to invest in. All you need is for your product to be in the hands of a couple hundred people. This validates you and shows that you are actually doing real work. Investors invest in people first; products and ideas are secondary for the most part. Take that money and hire for the things you are not good at. You don’t always need a co-founder. Sometimes a good employee can become your co-founder after the fact as they prove to you over time that they are trust-worthy, hardworking and capable.
4) Create a communication channels: Once you have an MVP ready, make sure that communication channels with your users are well established for continuous feedback. As an example, you can create a Discord group where your users can give you feedback and feature requests/ideas. That becomes the mechanism for other like-minded people, that are already using your product, to reach out to you. It would be impossible for me to count the number of times people have reached out to me via one of those communication channels about one of my startups. When people are excited about what you are doing, they will seek you out rather than the other way around.
5) COVID is actually a blessing not a curse: There are now tens of thousands of people like you that are sitting at home waiting for their moment to shine. They are all motivated and willing to get to work. You just need to have something to present to the world so that people can be excited. Remember, you are asking for someone to go on a journey together with you. Excite people and have them chase you.
Finally, if you (or anyone else for that matter) wants to have a chat about their startup/product, feel free to reach out to me. My email is in my profile.
The problem you are describing is not unique in any way, shape or form. I coach dozens of startups every year and your problem is more common than you might think. When I first started, I was just like you. I had no one to turn to and I felt like I could get nowhere. Meetups and networking events were and still are a waste of time for the most part as you don’t really want to get into business with people you´ve only met for 2 hours and know very little about on a personal level. So where does that leave you?
1) You don’t need a non-technical person: Find a technical co-founder who has transitioned into management or have some sense of how to run a business and have said person be in charge of the duties that you don’t excel at. The reason I usually make this recommendation to people in your position is that most non-technical people tend to have a problem communicating with their technical counter-part because they don´t understand the technical challenges ahead the same way you do. It leads to resentment and hostility when communication breaks down. This is one of the most common reasons startups fail. Communication is key in team building.
2) Keep working on your product and ignore all the fluff: Put your head down and grind an MVP out before worrying about any of the other stuff. We can all pump out ideas by the hundreds, but execution is really what matters at the end of the day. Building an MVP most often does not require a co-founder. It just requires you to spend some of your free time building things. Do what you can for now (if you are serious about this) and stop worrying about “expansion plans”, “go to market strategies” and “networks”.
2) Get a couple of advisors that you can trust: Ask those who have gone through this whole thing before and let them mentor you. A lot of times people connect via their advisors´ networks and that usually ends up being a lot more successful of a partnership. This is because any person your advisor is going to suggest you partner up with in some capacity will have been screened/filtered by said advisor. I connect people at least a dozen times a year that I think would be great fit for each other, and that ends up working a lot better than finding people via networking events. The key here is to find advisors that are honest and want what is in your best interest.
3) Utilize capital properly: If you have an MVP for an idea that is worth its salt, finding capital these days is extremely easy. In fact, it is so easy that people raise absurd amounts because capital is competing for deals. There is a lot more money out there than there are good companies to invest in. All you need is for your product to be in the hands of a couple hundred people. This validates you and shows that you are actually doing real work. Investors invest in people first; products and ideas are secondary for the most part. Take that money and hire for the things you are not good at. You don’t always need a co-founder. Sometimes a good employee can become your co-founder after the fact as they prove to you over time that they are trust-worthy, hardworking and capable.
4) Create a communication channels: Once you have an MVP ready, make sure that communication channels with your users are well established for continuous feedback. As an example, you can create a Discord group where your users can give you feedback and feature requests/ideas. That becomes the mechanism for other like-minded people, that are already using your product, to reach out to you. It would be impossible for me to count the number of times people have reached out to me via one of those communication channels about one of my startups. When people are excited about what you are doing, they will seek you out rather than the other way around.
5) COVID is actually a blessing not a curse: There are now tens of thousands of people like you that are sitting at home waiting for their moment to shine. They are all motivated and willing to get to work. You just need to have something to present to the world so that people can be excited. Remember, you are asking for someone to go on a journey together with you. Excite people and have them chase you.
Finally, if you (or anyone else for that matter) wants to have a chat about their startup/product, feel free to reach out to me. My email is in my profile.
Hi Wesam! What a great comment! It should be its own HN article; it's information-rich, and you make a lot of good points!
Hey, why not connect with me on LinkedIn:
www.linkedin.com/in/peter-sherman-a6107a5
Hey, why not connect with me on LinkedIn:
www.linkedin.com/in/peter-sherman-a6107a5
your email is not currently in your profile https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=wesammikhail
Fixed!
I would love to have a business co-founder! I'm a solid dev, worked for many years at a FAANG company, and MVP is done. Feel free to reach out (email in profile).
My I suggest Lunchclub, "Curated 1:1 professional connections."
https://lunchclub.ai/
https://lunchclub.ai/
I'd love to connect and collaborate, or point you to contacts who could collaborate with you. Please ping me at [email protected]
[deleted]
I went through joinef.com - a startup incubator which focuses on individuals joining in and finding cofounders there
Foundersnetwork.com has a few. If you need an invite let me know.
I tried to submit my email and got an access denied security warning, no explanation.
hey there, writing from FN. Would you be willing to share the reference ID on the WAF blocked access page so we can troubleshoot your issue? You can email it to support(at)foundersnetwork(dot)com.
Do you have a website with your portfolio
Not OP, but I am interested in this community and I am also getting an error when I try to sign up:
Access Denied foundersnetwork.com is using a security service for protection against online attacks. An action has triggered the service and blocked your request. Please try again in a few minutes. If the issue persist, please contact the site owner for further assistance.
I have a personal website but am not comfortable sharing here - is there a way to message you?
Access Denied foundersnetwork.com is using a security service for protection against online attacks. An action has triggered the service and blocked your request. Please try again in a few minutes. If the issue persist, please contact the site owner for further assistance.
I have a personal website but am not comfortable sharing here - is there a way to message you?
hey there, writing from FN. Would you be willing to share the reference ID on the WAF blocked access page so we can troubleshoot your issue? You can email it to support(at)foundersnetwork(dot)com.
what kind of projects are you working on? or what do you want to be working on?
here there might be one
twitter
Hi,
Dont mean to hijack the thread...
I am in a similar position. I have a startup toonclip.com. Its a web based animation editor, has about 100 registered users and has some product market fit. Would love to meet business oriented founders who are familiar with this industry. Please drop an email to leisenmint AT protonmail DOT com
Dont mean to hijack the thread...
I am in a similar position. I have a startup toonclip.com. Its a web based animation editor, has about 100 registered users and has some product market fit. Would love to meet business oriented founders who are familiar with this industry. Please drop an email to leisenmint AT protonmail DOT com
I'm at a FAANG company at the moment and I'm finding it quite unfulfilling (nothing new here), and for the last several months I've been hacking away on my own projects just to keep honing my skills and to try to figure out what's possible in terms of turning technical know-how into commercial products.
The last one I built felt like a relatively solid idea but I quickly realized (a) how much of the difficulty in launching the product depended on having a good network and knowing how to utilize it, and (b) how much I felt poorly equipped to do (a). Moreover, I'm also understanding how deeply reliant tech products are on domain knowledge in the industry they're attempting to push into.
The conclusion here seems to be that I'd be far more effective at reaching my goals working in partnership with someone who checks the above boxes (which, in hindsight, was incredibly obvious). The problem I'm having now, though, is that none of my friends are similarly motivated to me, and networking feels nigh-impossible with the COVID-19 situation.
Does anyone here have tips on how they meet people and feel out whether there's any professional compatibility – especially in the current situation? While I'm not opposed to just riding this out and trying to network the traditional way when the world reopens, it seems like there has to be a more effective way.