Non-hackers: how to find a co-founder(pashbonk.blogspot.com)
pashbonk.blogspot.com
Non-hackers: how to find a co-founder
http://pashbonk.blogspot.com/2007/04/how-to-find-cofounder.html
15 comments
If you're not a hacker then you'd better be good in marketing and a good negotiator because these are the skills that most hackers lack. This way you'll complement each other, and you'll have something to offer the partnership.
For the Jobs: how could he improve his marketing/negotiating skills?
For the Woz: how could he find a Jobs?
For the Woz: how could he find a Jobs?
I'm not convinced the best hackers are found in a university computer lab. When I was in college the only people in the computer lab were IRC addicts who were too broke to afford their own computer! The article mentions "the Woz" and I'm pretty sure steve jobs did not meet steve wozinak in a computer lab.
I don't think the advice in the article applies anymore. Who would go to a computer lab these days? I suspect people are more likely to use labtops and WLAN.
Also, I don't think hackers dislike Java. Judging by the number of Open Source projects in Java, I'd say it is popular among volunteers, too (not only people being forced to by their superiors are using it).
I am not sure studying programming is a good idea, either. I would also like to have a co-founder who is a graphics designer, marketing is good, too, generally somebody who gets things moving.
Also, I don't think hackers dislike Java. Judging by the number of Open Source projects in Java, I'd say it is popular among volunteers, too (not only people being forced to by their superiors are using it).
I am not sure studying programming is a good idea, either. I would also like to have a co-founder who is a graphics designer, marketing is good, too, generally somebody who gets things moving.
As with menloparkbum, I agree that labs might be a long shot. I also agree that cofounders with design and marketing skills would be great to have. Where would you go to find them?
I am only just starting to look - tough question. Maybe at a cartoon fair? Conferences? Local "special interest" group meetings? LinkedIn? Craigslist? Recommendations through friends? Parties at the local arts college?
I think a key point from the post is that non-hackers need to make the first move - because face it, you need them more than they need you, no matter how unfair you think that is.
I've thought about this for a bit and I really don't know who needs who more so I like to think a non-hacker needs a hacker both equally. For example, if a non-hacker can't find a hacker, he'll go hire one. Hiring one might not be the best approach but if you have the money to spend, why not? Of course it's always better to have a hacker as as cofounder. Now, a hacker - can be business savvy so he wouldn't need a non-hacker.
But lets think about this, you have a hacker who thinks he doesn't need a non-hacker. Well, most of the applications that hackers most likely build is for other hackers. When you speak to VCs, how many of them are hackers? Or a bunch of hacker guys building a 'fashion site'...uh what do guys know about fashion. In this case, I would go find a non-hacker chick to join the team b/c she'll know all the avenues and forum girls go to - marketing power.
You can build, but what you build won't always get users. I know there seems to be a view in Silicon Valley that MBAs are morons but it's wrong to lump them all into one group. I could easily say that a lot of hackers, while brilliant, may build something really 'cool' but so entirely 'useless.'
A hacker and non-hacker team is the best combination. You both need each other equally. There's no "I" in "Team."
But lets think about this, you have a hacker who thinks he doesn't need a non-hacker. Well, most of the applications that hackers most likely build is for other hackers. When you speak to VCs, how many of them are hackers? Or a bunch of hacker guys building a 'fashion site'...uh what do guys know about fashion. In this case, I would go find a non-hacker chick to join the team b/c she'll know all the avenues and forum girls go to - marketing power.
You can build, but what you build won't always get users. I know there seems to be a view in Silicon Valley that MBAs are morons but it's wrong to lump them all into one group. I could easily say that a lot of hackers, while brilliant, may build something really 'cool' but so entirely 'useless.'
A hacker and non-hacker team is the best combination. You both need each other equally. There's no "I" in "Team."
"For example, if a non-hacker can't find a hacker, he'll go hire one."
You can't build a successful tech business with a hired hacker. By choosing to hire, you'll only be able to attract programmers who are willing to work for the money you can pay them. The cream of the crop will pass you up in favor of startups that give them equity. Your first technical person sets a ceiling on the technical ability of your subsequent hires, because bad programmers are not able to recognize great ones.
If you're right and you do find a market niche that's extremely profitable, you'll invite competition. One of those competitors will inevitably have a top-notch hacker as a cofounder, and then you'll get eaten for lunch as their small, nimble team of elite hackers copies everything you do and then innovates way beyond it.
Many companies tried this approach in the dot-com boom, with predictable results. For example, Altavista/Lycos/Infoseek got eaten by Google, Value America by Amazon, Friendster and now MySpace by FaceBook.
You can't build a successful tech business with a hired hacker. By choosing to hire, you'll only be able to attract programmers who are willing to work for the money you can pay them. The cream of the crop will pass you up in favor of startups that give them equity. Your first technical person sets a ceiling on the technical ability of your subsequent hires, because bad programmers are not able to recognize great ones.
If you're right and you do find a market niche that's extremely profitable, you'll invite competition. One of those competitors will inevitably have a top-notch hacker as a cofounder, and then you'll get eaten for lunch as their small, nimble team of elite hackers copies everything you do and then innovates way beyond it.
Many companies tried this approach in the dot-com boom, with predictable results. For example, Altavista/Lycos/Infoseek got eaten by Google, Value America by Amazon, Friendster and now MySpace by FaceBook.
"MySpace by FaceBook" -- that's kind of arguable because MySpace was acquired and I really don't know who's making more money than whom. What about Digg? As for Google eating those companies you listed up..heck Google eats everyone up.
Having a hacker as a co-founder is always better than hiring which I stated. The point is, having a team of just solely hackers is not always better than having a team of a non-hacker and hacker.
Having a hacker as a co-founder is always better than hiring which I stated. The point is, having a team of just solely hackers is not always better than having a team of a non-hacker and hacker.
Oh my goodness. I'm truly alarmed by this article. The author needs to think more in terms innovation, and creating value (for him and his co-workers, his investors and his users) in places that people would not think to look.
I don't think it's about finding a hacker who can code in Ruby and then building a me too web2.0 app/website.
Web 2.0 and pastel coloured websites will come and go but good innovators will always be around whether they know how to program in the latest "geek" language or not.
I agree - it is reminiscent of the dot-com bubble. Everybody wants 'in' on the youtube billions.
How about how to find a co-founder if you've sent out flyers, list-serv emails and talked to professors? :P