
Ask HN:paying customers but annoying co-founder: should I stay or go - MichB
I have a non-tech co-founder. I handle everything technical, he handles the rest 
(including support, website maintenance, basic business stuff,...)<p>The guy is very stubborn and/or lacks communication skills. 
I has happened that I asked him 3 times in the same email conversation 'did you read X', without him saying 'yes I did' or give any other
indication that he read what I said or asked.
Or that I tell him 'please make sure you do X or it won't work' and then he emails me back "it doesn't work", where after a couple of
mails back/forth it turns out he just didn't do X. Or keeps on asking for a feature he would like but no one else would probably use.
After 10 mails he seems to understand why I won't implement it, but 3 days later he asks for the same feature again.<p>He also takes pride in maintaining our site, but he has no feeling for design or anything, making our site look like it's the 90's
on geocities all over again (without the moving homer simpson head). We've had customers tell us our site sucks.<p>I feel like I'm wasting my time. Which I hate.<p>We have a number of paying customers: enough to pay the bills, but by far not enough to pay us (still have day-time jobs and a family
to feed).<p>I'm contemplating if it would be better to just drop the project, find another co-founder I'm on the same wavelength with or go solo and
start something else. I'm a big advocate for building a working throw-away prototype before building the real deal.
So maybe it's good to regard this project as such: a throw-away prototype of a startup and learn from my mistakes.
I'd throw away years of work, but I gained a lot of knowledge and experience.<p>But it might be stupid to just leave things at this stage, seeing that we have a working product which people are willing to pay for.
Which, as far as I understand, is a stage a lot of startup projects don't even reach?<p>What would you do?
======
fleitz
You'll want to read business books and consult a lawyer. Figure out what your
options are. Dissolve the company, buy him out, get bought out, etc. A lawyer
can best advise you on these matters, also did you assign your IP to the
company? If not as others have suggested, just change the name on the door as
the code is yours (or, your employers if you didn't get that sorted out).
Also, consult a lawyer as there may be implicit agreements present, or legal
obligations you are unaware of.

Don't cut and run just because you are the tech guy and he is the biz guy.
Figure out the business side of things and get the guy out of YOUR company.
It's not going to be the first time you'll have to get someone out of your
company who has equity. This is a valuable opportunity to learn how to do
this.

If your site sucks, change it. I assume as tech guy you've got control of the
DNS records?

Stop asking for permission, and start taking control of your life and your
business.

~~~
cletus
You're jumping the gun here. Two prerequisites must be met before you consult
a lawyer:

1\. You've exhausted all other options; and

2\. You decided that what you're fighting for has enough monetary value to
justify the time and money you'll spend exploring and pursuing legal remedy.

Of course it's worth knowing your position. If you have no contract it's a
mess. If you don't have founder vesting it's a mess. He can walk away with
half but then again so can you.

You can take the lack of such formalities as pretext: say to your cofounder
you meed some structure. Say you need founder vesting and clear division of
responsibilities. Make yourself CEO and then you can decide who designs the
website. If necessary you can fire him then (without cause he'll still end up
with a piece but that can be better than half).

Or simply talk to him about your grievances and concerns.

If those conversations fail just wAlk away.

~~~
SkyMarshal
_1\. You've exhausted all other options; and_

Many times it's worth consulting a lawyer earlier rather than later, as such a
consultation can do all sorts of things for you - eliminate options you might
have otherwise wasted time pursuing, illuminate options you weren't aware of,
and also keep you from making any mistakes that could come back to hurt you
later.

That last point is most important and most overlooked by non-lawyers, I think.
I've learned from friends who have learned the hard way that in disputes like
this involving money or business, it's crucial you know the applicable law
from the outset and adhere to it, even if you only intend a legal solution as
the absolute last resort.

If it does come to that, your case is strongly bolstered in court if you can
show that you were aware of the applicable law and diligently followed it from
the outset. For example, if your adversary in court broke the law, and then
you broke it too to counteract him, the court will look unfavorably on both.
Two wrongs do not make a right, especially in the eyes of courts. So it's
worth positioning yourself from the beginning of any such dispute as
completely in compliance with legal requirements.

If you don't know what those requirements are, an early consultation with a
lawyer could be valuable.

PS - it's also less stressful to simply rely on the law to guide your
decisions in this uncharted territory, rather than trying to make it up as you
go. Don't reinvent the wheel here, instead leverage the hundreds/thousands of
years of codified dispute resolution and legal theory.

~~~
cletus
I guess my point is that you want to avoid a situation where your cofounder is
an "adversary".

~~~
SkyMarshal
Yes absolutely. Solve the problem by anticipating it and completely avoiding
it > all. Unfortunately the OP appears past that point.

~~~
cletus
Not necessarily. His cofounder may simply be oblivious to his level of
concern. Until he's sat down and said "I'm not happy with A, B and C and if I
can't get satisfactory resolution I'm going to have to stop doing this"
(perhaps leave out the ultimatum part at first) then it's premature to either
fight or run.

------
xenophanes
> _I has happened that I asked him 3 times in the same email conversation 'did
> you read X', without him saying 'yes I did' or give any other indication
> that he read what I said or asked. Or that I tell him 'please make sure you
> do X or it won't work' and then he emails me back "it doesn't work", where
> after a couple of mails back/forth it turns out he just didn't do X._

That is normal. Basically 90% of non-nerds, and 50% of nerds, do that a lot.
Get used to it. Get over it. You aren't going to be able to only do business
with people who think in the same detail-oriented way that you (and I) do.

As annoying as it is, you should not make your decision based on that. What
you need to consider is: what does he bring to the table? Can he effectively
do something that brings substantial value to the company? If he can pull his
weight for making a profit, then it doesn't matter if he's not as smart as
you.

~~~
mattchew
Astonished that this was voted down:

> what does he bring to the table?

is a very good question I didn't notice anyone else asking.

You talk about the negatives, and seem to _imply_ there aren't many positives,
but are there any?

Another thing I didn't notice anyone else saying, is maybe you could take a
cooling out period. Back away for a little bit (tell him you're doing this of
course) and see what happens and how you feel if you get a little "space" for
a week or two. I bet you'll get some clarity about what you want to do, one
way or the other.

------
Murkin
Run.

Been there, done that. (I didn't run soon enough)

The heart-to-heart stuff is nice and warm for about a week. If you have been
having problems for a long while, trust your senses and leave before you are
more heavily invested.

Remember all those books/articles/posts about how having a great co-founder is
important. (Anyone got good quotes for this ?)

~~~
rgrieselhuber
I've heard so many breakup stories recently that I'm starting to believe in
many cases it's less risky to not have a co-founder and just get to the point
where you can hire people.

~~~
ct
I concur - it's worse than being married.

------
radley
I'll be the contrarian...

As a techie you have to take a step back and ask yourself: are my expectations
like a programmer or like a person? People aren't machines and partnerships
are usually far from perfect at first.

Being inexperienced, your partner is not going to grasp (and hold on to)
X-tech concept as quickly as a veteran like yourself. It also sounds like he
is wearing a lot of hats (on top of family and day job) so his attention could
be very divided.

It may not be time to pay yourselves, but it may be time to consider
outsourcing stuff that neither of you can manage - such as the website
redesign.

------
ThrowAway80
Throwaway account, since I don't want to link this to my real name. But:
Leave. Your feelings will only get stronger, and it will be harder to leave if
things seem to go better business wise. But you can't ignore your feelings,
and will only get unhappier with the situation.. I did, and am happy I left,
only should have done it earlier.

------
wisty
It sounds like a lot of passive aggression on both sides.

Here's your problem - he thinks he's the boss, and you think you are the boss.

He asks you to implement a feature. You don't think it's a good idea. You both
give each other a bunch of reasons why. He ends the conversation with "OK,
it's sounds like it's a bad idea then". He retreats for a while, then decides
to go another three rounds.

My S.O. and I have similar conversations, though it's usually about tech vs.
clothing purchases. Who wants to spend 1000 on a sweater? A DSLR lens is a
much better purchase. Anyway ...

The point is, you have unaligned goals or unaligned strategies for reaching
those goals. As you've said, you aren't on the same wavelength. That's not
really unhealthy - sometimes other people are right when they disagree with
you. Sometimes not.

You have two options (IMO):

* You both have to agree that you trust each-other, but you are aware that you disagree at times (due to your separate skill sets, expectations, etc). You both have to work to minimize the impact of the quibbling, and you need mechanisms to help you here - most companies have minute books to record decisions for this very reason.

* Split.

------
jackowayed
You're still very early in the project. You have paying customers, but it
sounds like that's more-or-less just covering hosting costs, etc. You have a
long way to go if you're going to turn this into a real business that makes
you rich. A long way to go where you'll be working with this guy and splitting
your profits with this guy.

Talk to him about your concerns and see if you can work something out. But if
you have any doubt that he's the right cofounder for you (which it sounds like
you still will after talking to him), get out now. The longer you wait, the
more it'll feel like you should just stick it out because of how much work
you've already done and how well it's going.

But though it may feel like things are going great right now, you really
haven't invested that much time in this, and you don't want to spend 5 years
with a cofounder that you don't feel is pulling his weight. If you don't think
you can spend 5 years working with this guy, get out now.

------
okeumeni
Pure business cofounders always seems to me as a wrong choice. MBA guys
generally don’t understand what goes into coding; they see tech guys as
replaceable robots. I tried so far to work on friends projects or have friends
working on my project with no success when the guy is pure MBA; most of the
time project won’t event take off.

I will say you are deep in it, you should fight and try to acquire more
control and swing things your way.

------
osterman
You really should be talking face-to-face as much as possible and I do not
understand why you are sending e-mails in the first place. It sounds like you
two live and work far away from each other and in that case I believe you are
doomed anyhow.

But yea just leave, a conflict like this just gets worse and worse. Specially
when one of the parties in the conflict doesn't realize there is one. If you
really believe in this business you could always take in outside help but I
believe that is your only chance to fix the actual issue.

If you aren't prepared to do that, run.

~~~
AjJi
IMO, In this particular case, face-to-face discussions will make the matter
worse.

The co-founder doesn't READ his emails/IMs let alone remembering what has been
discussed.

~~~
JabavuAdams
Newsflash. Nobody reads (I mean really reads) e-mails. Get used to it.

~~~
AjJi
Are you saying that I was doing it the wrong way the whole time? :D

I mean, you really can't make that a rule. I read (and re-read) important
mails, I guess I'm not the only one, am I ?

~~~
owkaye
Of course you're not the only one who reads his emails. JabavuAdams is FOS as
far as I'm concerned. I've been a developer for almost two decades and I
always read my emails -- CAREFULLY.

In fact I have every client agree with me from the beginning that our emails
serve as the written terms our agreements when we both agree in writing. And I
ask them to always save every email they send me and every email they receive
from me, so that we will both have a written trail of correspondence to refer
to when (not if) there are any misunderstandings.

This system has served me well for many many years, so for someone to make an
all-encompassing claim that no one reads emails is just plain ridiculous.

~~~
JabavuAdams
Come on, do you seriously believe that I'm arguing that 0 people read e-mails?

What I was trying to convey is that you'll constantly be surprised at the
number of intelligent, educated, detail-oriented people who did not in fact
read what you wrote.

If you optimize your communications to assume this, you will become a better
communicator.

EDIT> There's another important subtext here. I've often seen the following
pattern: developer is confronted with user behaviour, but continues to talk
about "I do this, I do that", rather than internalizing that others do not do
as he does.

------
bkj123
Have you directly brought these issues to his attention? If you haven't...

I'd list the items that are bothering you most and how'd you like to have them
resolved. Maybe run it by a trusted friend - someone who will be directly
honest with you. Then, break the list into two categories - can live with it
and can't live with it. For the former, make like a duck - let them roll off
your back. Just shrug your shoulders, roll your eyes, and say 'Oh that
<cofounder name> is silly'. For the later, I'd look to directly address your
partner in a manner that is meaningful to him. If you come to some consensus,
set ways to monitor it to see if things are improving.

After this, you will have accomplished 2 things. One, you took ownership of
the situation in a mature and constructive manner. This helps, especially if
things don't work out, since you know you gave it your best (read: less
regrets). Two, you'll have a better idea of how likely things are to improve.

If you have done this and things are not working, then look at the options. Is
it worth sticking it out? If not, list your options. Often times, the black
and white options (quit cold turkey and stick it out) are not the best.
Consider options like decreasing your role, decreasing his, bringing in a
third party (e.g. a design guy), having distinct boundaries of
responsibilities, or you taking over the design element.

If it is time to part ways, I'm sure you'll do it in a professional manner
that doesn't burn bridges.

Best wishes.

------
dotBen
It doesn't sound like this is the right co-founder and if you have any
inclination that this is the case at this early stage of the company then do
something about it NOW.

Aside from the personality issues it doesn't sound like he's bringing enough
to the table to help your company elevate to where it needs to be - that's
business and in addressing this you might get better mileage using this as the
grounds for action because they are explicit and practical.

"You can't keep the site looking the way users want it" and "You don't have
the product development skills needed as you are raising feature ideas that
are not being asked" are all explicit issues you can use. "I don't like the
way you communicate" is not, even if that is _really_ the issue.

I would be VERY careful about dissolving the company and then taking IP with
you to a new company, as others have suggested. He would be in his right to
lay claim to his share of the IP.

There are ways around that however. Getting the company to grant each of you a
non-exclusive perpetual right to the technology, then dissolving the business,
then you going off and setting a new business with it is one way (that also
lets him do the same, with a new co-founder perhaps, so be confident he won't
be successful).

But you MUST see a lawyer (retained personally, not on the business of course)

------
Mz
Sounds like you do a lot of emailing. Email is a tough way to communicate.
Have you considered trying another medium? (chat, texting, phone
calls....etc.)

------
Flam
From the sounds of it, do you even need him? Seems like something you can get
an employee to do, and for cheaper.

------
lisperforlife
Judge if your other co-founder brings value in terms of the business network
with potential markets, partners or investors. If you feel that he is needed
for the business to function then you should probably be looking to outsource
the website. Since you have paying customers for your project, you can do a
simple A/B test by announcing that you are going to release the feature in
question and provide a sign up/ i am interested form. You can tell be the
number of customers who would be interested in the feature versus your
existing customer base.

If you genuinely feel that the non-tech co-founder is not bringing enough
value to the table, you must probably be looking at buying out part or whole
of the stake. However, I suggest that you get knowledge of the other aspects
of the business such as accounting, tax filing norms and such. Most of the
other stuff, you can find others to handle for you without parting with your
equity.

------
rumpelstiltskin
You already have the technical aspect down. So disband the project, find a
better co-founder and simply restart the same thing anew. You can be up and
running in a fraction of the time.

Basically, do what Arrington did with Calacanis (with regards to running the
TechCrunch conference).

------
giffo
"What would you do?"

First I would get on his case, tell him the website needs to be updated
because the service will not grow into a real business in its current 1990s
design. Show him websites that I feel are a good standard and what I expect
our site to be like. If he can't do that then it is the wrong partnership for
me.

I would stop working on the project(in relation to his
ideas/feedback/requests), tell him I need the website updated a few decades or
I'm on my way.

and then plan do the whole thing on my own while keeping an eye out for
another co-founder with some technical ability aswell as business interests.

\-----------

You should take the positives out of this project in its current state. You
have the technical side down and you know you can get customers to pay for the
service.

------
limedaring
Have you sat down and had a heart-to-heart with him? Cover all these points. I
think his response will be a better indicator of whether you should stay or
leave.

------
mynameisraj
Talk with a few advisors and lawyers individually, and then if you still don't
have a clear idea, maybe meet with some advisors/lawyers with both of you in
the room.

If all else fails, I'd re-write the business plan in terms of who does what.
What are you good at? What aren't you good at? If he has a bad sense of
design, maybe he shouldn't be handling that aspect, etcetera.

With that said, I hope that all goes well and that this startup succeeds!

------
Aegean
I think this is a typical 'go with your heart' situation. If your gut feeling
tells you you're not enjoying it for such and such annoying reasons it is a
clear sign that its not the best thing for you. In these situations ending is
better than mending. That is because mending will take up your time only to
have you end up in a marginally better condition. If you feel this is the case
start from scratch.

------
sammcd
I was in a similar situation but with a much more competent partner. But for
different reasons we just weren't headed in the same direction.

I said hey, here is a deal I am happy with. I am happy to be on either side of
this deal, because it is fair.

Not sure how much I can talk about it, but it had to do with one partner
getting the company and the other getting an X percent royalty for Y years.

------
MichB
Thanks for all the advice and different point of views. I though I'd be lucky
to get 1 or 2 responses. I hadn't expected more than 40. It sure offers some
food for thought.

Some people said: live with it, people don't read their email. Well, I send at
least 20 mails a day at the daytime job, and I know quite well how much the
average person reads from your mail and that when you ask a direct question,
it usually gets answered. I've also seen the same email issues with customers.

What does he bring to the table? Well, basically he handles all things I
prefer not to. Does he bring something unique that can't be replaced? No. It's
pretty hard to find someone who wants to be an entrepreneur though and who
wants to put in hard work that might make a profit later. For me it seems to
be an almost impossible task to find someone who wants to be an entrepreneur,
that is a complement to my skills, who I get along with and is fairly local to
me.

I know lots of competent people, but none of them are interested in becoming
an entrepreneur unfortunately.

I know from experience though that when working solo, once the fun technical
part is over, it's too easy to find another interesting technology or idea and
start hacking at that. I've got several of such unfinished projects. That's a
big motivator for me to get a co-founder.

Concerning that it seems that we both like to be boss: well, we both have a
management function (during the daytime job) where we need to coordinate/steer
people. We both are used to being right.

I don't want to bring any lawyers to the table though and I don't want to just
run with the project and leave him in the cold (although I could). I wouldn't
want him to do that to me, so I won't do that to him. I also know that this
would make me feel too guilty, which isn't worth it.

I thought having a working product and paying customers is pretty much, but
the comments on here have made me realize that this is just the beginning.
Which is it, we'd have to grow the number of paying customer at least 10-fold
to be able to replace our current income from the daytime job.

Basically I've decided to give it 1 month and then re-evaluate. I'm planning
on putting all issues in a notebook or file somewhere together with the date,
because I tend to concentrate fully on work and family and forget about what
happened when. Sort of a diary, to get a better view on things.

Thanks for all the advice and insight!

~~~
SabrinaDent
Listen, if he's your partner and he's doing the stuff you don't want to do and
you have paying customers, it seems to me it's worth trying to salvage over
the next month. If your partner is doing more harm than good in certain
aspects, why not agree that you need to formalise those aspects to accelerate
growth, and then do it in a way that actually helps him not screw up?

For example: you say your website is a mess. If he can make it ugly, then he
has too much control. Move to a CMS with a tight templating system and
eliminate this pain point. If he's making repeat (and poor) feature requests,
move to a formal feature request system with upvoting and make it public. Then
you can point out that a particular feature has no user support. If you're
answering the same questions over and over, institute an internal helpdesk
system and just refer him to the answered, closed tickets and the search when
he re-asks.

Basically, look at it as a management issue. The human factor is always going
to be an issue no matter what startup you pursue; if you lack the soft skills
to deal with it well, a systems approach might take you 80% of where you need
to go until you've expanded enough to bring in another person who's designated
job it is to take responsibility for these decisions.

------
ashitvora
If you are looking for boolean answer: GO

What's the point in staying in a company where you are not happy (in this case
because of cofounder). You can either resolve the issue or separate and start
something of your own.

------
EasyCompany
Talking to your co-founder will not help, from what you have written seems
like he has a personality issue and this will take a long time to
correct......you first have to get him to accept the issue is with him. My
advice would be to be smart, put personal feelings and emotions aside and try
to engineer a way to get him out of the company or you and the company away
from him. Time is so precious, you can't waste it on someone not ready/mature
enough for the start up world yet, especially when you have a family.

~~~
thorax
Be careful-- We all know from experience that there's two sides to every
story. The other guy's perspective could just as easily make it appear as if
the OP has the personality issue.

The truth is that every founder is different and every one of them has issues.
The successful team is going to be able to compensate for each other's
weaknesses.

The key here is to really step up the communication-- if you do that and still
nothing works out, I'd say only then start the plan to leave.

The day you believe in your heart of hearts that you did your best, but it
wasn't enough to compensate, then you've fulfilled your obligation to the
partner. I don't sense the OP has yet tried his true best-- or else he'd know
there isn't more he could do to make it work.

Would you want him to bail/cut-out on you because he felt like you two
couldn't communicate? At least without coming to you first to figure out a way
to improve the communication issues?

~~~
EasyCompany
"The day you believe in your heart of hearts that you did your best"

Sometimes when u wait that long, the opportunity has been taken by someone
else, you running out of money or your customer's are just too frustrated with
your business. I believe that you are correct that stepping up communication
is important but we also have to keep in mind that time is money. My advice
would be to put a time frame on it and if the issue is not solved start
executing your plan. Also always remember that the health of the business
comes first.

------
petervandijck
Tell him you're leaving, and offer him (as an alternative) to buy him out for
a low price.

------
pmichaud
Could you potentially buy him out? Just replace him.

------
siruva07
If you decide to go solo or drop the project (so as to not have to worry about
buying out your partner, or maybe because you're over this one and want to
move on), have you considered selling the company?

I'm interested in hearing more about the company and would consider buying it.
You can contact me via email on about.me/sir

(ps. I'd probably want to hire you back ;))

