
Idea reach and the cofounder myth - noelsequeira
http://swombat.com/2012/1/19/idea-reach-cofounder-myth
======
dasil003
Great article. Aside from the fact that being approached by someone "looking
for a co-founder" is a turn-off (on par with being approached by someone
looking for a spouse), it's also not a good sign of a successful entrepreneur.
The successful entrepreneur archetype will be executing at all stages. If they
believe that the lynchpin is an external person that will make it magically
come together then they probably don't have the chops to make it through all
the challenges that startups inevitably face. This is distinctly different
from hiring an engineer, or meeting someone who shares passion and applicable
skills for your idea.

As far as swinging for the fences goes, I believe that is a middle stage
decision. When you have some traction, you are potentially faced with
difficult choices about whether to "sell out" or not. If you are just starting
out and you decide you are "going to be the next Google" that is just pie-in-
the-sky dreaming, not swinging for the fences. If you want to be an Apple,
Google or Amazon you will need to build it up over the course of decades
through a series of successful pivots to scale up. Facebook is the most recent
example, where the entire momentum of the site was imparted from the
exclusivity of a truly tiny market (Harvard students), and then pivoting
pivoting to progressively wider markets. For any of these companies the risks
are incredible at each pivot, so swinging for the fences is more akin to
building 5 startups in a row successfully. The only way you're going to get
there is by building one regular small startup first and then repeatedly
taking it to the next level from there. I don't think it's any different for
YC startups other than that they start out with better connections, but that
does not a business model make.

~~~
rpwilcox
I agree - I think that part about "swinging for the fences" waters down the
article's message. "well of _course_ my idea for Facebook for cats is a great
idea - I've got to swing for the fences!!"... Which could be the take-a-way
for some people from this very down to earth article.

------
tomblomfield
Interesting article - I agree with a lot of what you say.

>> YCombinator has made it a successful business model to take founders and
virtually catapult them far away from their idea reach, and succeed anyway
through a combination of exceptional founder selection and world-class
mentoring

Actually, I think what Y Combinator is very good at is recruiting decent
hackers. They're then encouraged to build prototypes very quickly within what
you call their "idea reach" and talk to users to iterate & improve. In fact,
almost all the YC companies that spring to mind are very much within the "idea
reach" of the founders. Both the "success stories" (Airbnb, Dropbox, Heroku)
and the more recent ones - (Codecademy, Parse, Mongo HQ, Verbling etc etc) all
fit this mold.

Non-technical founders are very occasionally accepted, but almost always
required to find a technical co-founder to extend their idea reach to
including something software-focussed.

------
davidw
> YCombinator has made it a successful business model to take founders and
> virtually catapult them far away from their idea reach, and succeed anyway
> through a combination of exceptional founder selection and world-class
> mentoring.

There's a bit of a logical flaw there: either it's "catapulting them away from
their reach", or, through "founder selection", picking people who have a far
reach in the first place.

~~~
swombat
I don't think there's a logical flaw. I think (perhaps wrongly, as pointed out
in another comment) that YC pushes people to do something way beyond their
reach, but then makes up for the skills gap by providing them with incredible
mentoring and connections.

So basically it extends their idea reach...

~~~
davidw
Saying that YC pushes people to do something 'beyond their reach' is fair, but
saying that it extends their reach by selecting the right people is... not
consistent.

Anyway, it's a good article, that's just a nitpick that jumped out at me.

~~~
RyanMcGreal
Maybe "the right people" are those people who can take advantage of YC's
capacity to extend their reach.

~~~
davidw
Probably, but that's not quite the same thing:

"YC is able to extend founders' reach by... selecting founders" says nothing
about YC actually doing something to extend founders reach, merely that
they're good at selecting long-reach founders.

I do believe that they extend the reach of founders that they have selected,
in any event.

------
lrobb
>>This is a brilliant idea, and after you explore it (using, for example, the
lean methods which only evolved 10 years later, because you're a visionary),
you decide that this is worth pursuing, it has a lot of market potential.

I do hope that was tongue in cheek... Those "lean methods" have been around
forever; What's happened in the last 10 years is that they've been packaged
and sold.

~~~
rgraham
I think what you're saying is true from a certain perspective, but I also
think that a lot of great progress comes from cross pollination of ideas. If
field A solves a problem using method X, but field B has never applied method
X then someone who makes that connection and applies X to B can start a mini-
revolution in field B. New is pretty relative in that sense, especially if you
reflect on Solomonic wisdom: "There is nothing new under the sun."

~~~
lrobb
Maybe it's more helpful for product development teams in mid-size or larger
firms... In the realm of bootstrappers & hustlers, most of the advice is SOP,
just re-branded.

------
akg
There really is no difference between successful entrepreneurs and
unsuccessful ones except for the decision to do it. I find that most
successful people have the trait is that they take action regardless of the
fact that they have a co-founder or not. They naively move forward and as
obstacles come in their way, find ways to solve them.

Most of the time what makes or breaks a startup is the tenacity to stick with
it and plow through obstacles. Of course, one has to be practical in some
cases (e.g., the iPhone example mentioned in the article). But I think in most
cases, there is always a solution. As Brian Chesky says, "If you can imagine
it, you can create it".

~~~
demallien
_As Brian Chesky says, "If you can imagine it, you can create it"._

What a silly thing to say. A quick glance at pretty much any sci-fi novel
proves that. Go on, go build me a light-sabre, capable of cutting through
metre-thick bulkheads. Once you've finished with that, I'd like a time machine
so I can go back in time and look at dinosaurs, and also a perpetual motion
machine. I leave the order of the last two up to you.

~~~
langsamer
I don't think that quote is meant to be taken literally. It's more a
commentary on how you can accomplish most things you can put your mind to; the
only limits you place are those you impose on yourself.

And I don't know, but it might be possible to create a light-sabre. Who knows.
I am sure that we live with technology today that seemed just as impossible
100 years ago.

------
thesash
Great article, I think that one of the biggest barriers to people becoming
entrepreneurs is the failure to grasp the fact that there is a vast spectrum
in the skills (technical or otherwise) needed to get a business off the
ground.

However, while I agree with your point that "I'm looking for the right
cofounder" is really only an excuse covering up either a reluctance to jump in
or an idea out of reach, there comes a point in any business (Maybe once you
come up against an unforeseen technical problem, difficulty securing
partnerships, ), when it becomes necessary to bring great people on board in
at a co-founder level who complement your skills and make up for your
shortcomings. The key here is having access to the right people, so that you
don't have to "look" for the right people.

I think that in this case what determines your ability to recruit the best
people comes from your "Network reach" which varies from person to person, but
is something that must be cultivated as diligently as technical knowledge or
business knowledge, by maintaing the right relationships, associating yourself
with the right communities and groups, connecting people with each other, and
carefully training yourself to recognize and maximize opportunity when it
arises.

------
BadassFractal
This is actually a fantastic article, I'm glad I stumbled upon it.

"If, however, you've got very limited savings, and failure will propel you
back into a corporate environment and a job you hate, then it might be better
to focus on achieving survival and comfort first. That's easier with an idea
that's within your reach." pretty much describes my situation!

Daniel, do you have an article where you're recommending a path for a solo
entrepreneur that might eventually lead him to attracting cofounders? Anything
in the pipeline perhaps? I imagine it'd be along the lines of "work on what's
within your reach, have both the idea and your own execution so far be
attractive enough that someone will want to join forces with you".

Also, if your idea reach is for 1 person worth of work, why would you even
need a cofounder?

------
soup10
I liked this article. A lot of what I see encouraged by incubators and
investors is "swing for the fences" type startups where they try to expand
your sights to aim for as broad and as lucrative a market as possible. These
are a horrible idea for most first time founders, especially those attempting
to escape the shackles of a corporate job. Founders that set their sights
lower and have a crystal clear plan of how to achieve profitability are much
more likely to succeed.

