
Ask HN: How common is this view within software startup community? - throwaway564738
A year ago I had an opportunity to visit a software startup incubator. The views within most of the aspiring founders in that incubator was that they do not require software engineers&#x2F;professionals as a founding team member. The software can be developed using &quot;interns or cheap Indians&quot; and that way the founding teams do not have to share equity.<p>I heard the same argument recently by some other aspiring founders.<p>So just out of curiosity, how common is this view within the software startup community?
======
oblib
That was pretty much the impression I got when going through Startup School
here last autumn.

The focus was on beating the bushes to see if you could generate interest
(finding "Market Fit") and using an "MVP" (minimum viable product) that didn't
even have to be a working product, to basically provide an image
(illustrations, videos, etc) of what it will do.

If you can generate interest then you start building a product. Pretty much
the opposite of "If you build it they will come".

So, in that scenario, getting a software engineer is often akin to going to
the hardware store and buying a hammer.

~~~
ishjoh
in your experience at startup school, who created the illustrations and
videos, the founders themselves or did they get a designer involved?

~~~
oblib
I created my own. I think a few others in our group may have hired that out.
They didn't ask or look for slick production of those though. They were more
focusd on the message.

For me, Startup School was pretty overwhelming. I had no idea of what to
expect, was a team of one, and I'm a coder, not a marketer.

Startup School is really about marketing and "finding market fit", and to a
lessor degree the process of getting funded, setting up the structure of
corporation, and, lastly, building the product.

But the actual building of the product was not focused on at all. That comes
after you prove a viable market exists and get funded.

------
Ozzie_osman
Not sure where the incubator you visited was, but I'd say mainstream view in
Silicon Valley is that most teams need a technical cofounder (unless the
startup just isn't technical at all). If anything, it's sometimes the other
extreme: people will claim that technical cofounders don't need business
cofounders.

That said, since it is so difficult to find technical cofounders, some teams
end up outsourcing technical work out of necessity (not because they don't
want to share equity).

------
raihansaputra
So I'm an early employee in a small startup that decided outsourcing the
software was the way to create the MVP. It bought the company valuable time to
start because none of the founders was technical and they just want the MVP to
launch on the app stores. We did launch early and the MVP is working to
validate business processes and iron out things we did not think about before.
One thing that's left is the technical debt for extensibility/maintenance.

One thing I want to bring up in this scenario is the need for the founders to
still find a key technical person ASAP as they are trying to prove their idea
works. If one of the company's edge is in their technical capability[0], you
need someone in house to own the stack eventually. Preferably experienced, as
they need to look over the handed over code and vet any possible future
problems and/or fix any pressing bugs ASAP.

[0]: Technical edge does not have to be bleeding edge technology. Most of the
time, the advantage of having the right CRUD app built that is an improvement
over your competitor/existing business process/product is enough.

------
nickwhite99
Ideally you'd want at least one technical founder...helps with hiring,
determining the correct stack long term, and general tech decision making

------
razorbladeknife
Very common specially now, many companies have popped up which charge
competitive rates for development.

Keep in mind, most startups are simply CRUD apps where you don't need much
technology.

~~~
s_erik
If the startups are just CRUD apps then are those defensible businesses? As
per my understanding most successful software businesses have something in
their tech stack that cannot be easily replicated.

~~~
razorbladeknife
It's not true.

Think of Dropbox or Instagram or even Amazon

What's there which technologically can't be replicated given enough money?

It's the userbase/network effect which can't be reflected if given

~~~
_448
But they all had technical founders/co-founders? Thats what I think OP's
question was related to?

