

Ask HN: Why is it so important to have a cofounder? - mcrittenden

I'm relatively new to this, but I keep seeing people say that you need a cofounder and that almost no startups are successful with only a single founder.<p>Why is this so? I can see why it might be so for funded startups (since investors might take you more seriously if you have a cofounder), but does it also apply to bootstrapped startups? Should I really be worried if I'm planning on bootstrapping a startup with no cofounder?
======
david927
You'll hear, "Because otherwise it's too hard." While there's some truth to
that, it's hardly the real reason. The real reason is the reason that there is
a lucrative industry for poetry contests: author's bias. Everyone thinks their
poetry is good. Ask any startup founder to rate their idea, and they'll rank
it in the top 10% of ideas. Which means 90% of us are delusional. (We'd have
to be, to do what we do.)

A cofounder doesn't have to have equity or work on the project. They are the
person you know who will be brutally honest with you. They have to have the
ability to say, "This feature you love is stupid," and have you spend time
deeply considering it. They take "you" and your author's bias (as much as
possible) out of the startup.

And that's key, because if it works for you is irrelevant. It has to work for
your market. No one, ESPECIALLY YOU, can say if that will be so. The best is
where you can have the market itself give you feedback, but they are mostly
incapable of enunciating what they truly want. So you have to guess. And when
you do that, you need someone to help you winnow the chaff of what you like
from the grain of what your market wants and needs.

~~~
mcrittenden
So is there any reason this role couldn't be filled with a friend that you
bounce ideas off of (assuming that friend was qualified to comment on them)?

~~~
prateekdayal
Generally it helps to bounce ideas off someone who is personally invested in
the startup. You tend to value their inputs a lot more too.

Ofcourse, if the other person is a startup veteran, things are different but
then they may not have enough time to go into details of your startup

------
joshklein
I've found that cofounders can be both a blessing and a curse. I started
something on my own that failed because I lacked the discipline to lock my
brain in to work mode from 9am to 5pm. Working in my apartment - sometimes
still in whatever I slept in - made me blur the lines between what was life
and what was work. If you have a cofounder, at the very minimum you'll have to
get dressed in the morning :) Hopefully, you'll also have someone keeping you
accountable to deadlines, questioning what you did that day, and so on. Not in
a manager style, but because they genuinely need to know what you've done
every day.

But I've also started things with cofounders that didn't work out (I wouldn't
say "failed" because they were more false starts than outright failures). You
really do have to think of cofounding like a marriage, because you and your
cofounder have to have the same set of goals. In 10 years, do you still want
to be working side by side with this person? Could you take direction from
them if you ultimately decide they should be the final say on something? Do
you have the same exit strategy? Do you want to live in the same city as them?
Do you want a small company or a big one? What kind of culture do you want
your company to have? When are you both quitting your day jobs / consulting?

It may seem like discussing these things are premature when you're hacking in
a garage, but the answers aren't nearly as important as the questions. You
don't want to have a vision for selling a 50 person company to Google while
your cofounder sees your startup as side income to his day job. And you
definitely don't want to see your startup as an 80 hour/week gig while your
cofounder sees it as a 10/hour week gig.

I follow Seth Godin's advice on partnership: 50/50 is a bad idea, period.
Business requires decision-making, and someone should be the final say. If you
wouldn't be okay deferring to your cofounder (even when he is wrong), maybe
it's not the right cofounder. And ownership should be a factor determined by
both time and money put in, not one or the other. Your agreement with your
partner should stipulate how much time you'll be logging for the project, and
ownership should be tied to actually "showing up".

~~~
JimboOmega
The first paragraphs sums up what I think on the matter.

If you are at home... nobody is depending on you... It's easy to "drift". If
somebody is there to say "Hey, did you finish X?" - that can be enough to get
you to remember what you were doing, and get on it, without going off onto
obscure feature land.

Whether you're hyper-motivated (and have a tendency to obsess about small
things that don't matter) or under-motivated (and have a tendency to not
really produce unless necessary), you'll benefit from a partner.

Just knowing someone else in the world loves your idea helps too. But again, I
have to agree with the OP, make sure you are on the same page. Those "it
sounds cool I'll chip in when I have time" people can be an absolute drain of
your time and energy. (Those who want both money and an equity stake for one
specific piece of the puzzle are the worst).

A co-founder has to be as committed as you are to derive the benefits.

------
moconnor
Don't take a cofounder just because pg tells you you'll need one; his advice,
while _awesome_ , doesn't always apply to bootstrapped startups.

People like to draw a distinction between funded and bootstrapped startups,
including me ([http://yieldthought.com/post/1156084359/single-vs-co-
founder...](http://yieldthought.com/post/1156084359/single-vs-co-founders))

The poster-child for single-founder startups is Patrick (patio11), although I
don't know how many more times I can refer to him as a _poster-child_ before
he asks me to stop. Read everything he's written (<http://www.kalzumeus.com/>)
if you're going to bootstrap something.

Another notable single founder is Gabriel Weinberg (epi0Bauqu):
[http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2010/01/will-single-
foun...](http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2010/01/will-single-founders-
please-stand-up.html)

------
RiderOfGiraffes
This has been discussed many time before:

<http://searchyc.com/submissions/single+founder?sort=by_date>

<http://searchyc.com/submissions/solo+founder?sort=by_date>

More important is a longer list of why startups fail:

<http://www.paulgraham.com/startupmistakes.html>

~~~
mcrittenden
Thanks, that gives me a lot to digest. And thanks for showing me
searchyc.com...as a newbie, that's new to me.

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
Newbie? Account created 356 days ago? Interesting ...

~~~
mcrittenden
Yup, created and forgotten about until a few weeks ago.

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
Welcome back.

------
slackerIII
One important reason is that you can't be good at everything. Having someone
else who can focus on skills A & B while you focus on skills C & D is nice, if
you can trust the other person to be competent. Especially consider that
skills A & B might be things you hate, eg paying taxes and doing bookkeeping.

Another big reason is that if I put a lot of work into a new design or a
feature, I'm in the worst position to critique it. You need someone else who
can provide objective feedback. Customers can do this to some extent, but it
is very easy to dismiss their suggestions.

Related to that 2nd point, it is often tempting to say, "this is good enough"
when you have to do all the work yourself. Having someone to push you to do
better can really improve the quality of your output.

~~~
chailatte
Yes, nobody is good at everything. However, that's why hiring and delegation
of responsibility is an essential skill in a good entrepreneur.

You can't contract a decent designer for $500 to launch a prototype?

You can't hire a good accountant for $50/session?

You won't muster up the strength to manage a remote programmer for $10/hour?

You'd rather give away 55% of your company?

then you probably shouldn't be starting a company.

------
brk
If you want funding, it's helpful to show that at least one other person
believes in you and will drink the Kool Aid.

If you're bootstrapping, it's helpful to have someone else to talk ideas over
with, share the workload with and keep each other motivated and focused.

Some of would also be a factor of your personal skills and motivation and the
scope of the project. It is certainly possible with the frameworks and hosting
options we have today to get a project off the ground entirely on your own.
But for larger things or building a "company" instead of a "lifestyle app",
you'll generally end up needing multiple people to pull it off.

------
hasenj
Depends on what kind of startup you want to start. If you can't find a co-
founder, just do something that you can handle. It doesn't have to be the next
google or youtube.

Something like 37signal's basecamp can be written by a single person. In fact,
I think it was (at the beginning ..)

------
trustfundbaby
a. they can fill in holes in your startup game (biz dev, marketing, chasing
funding etc).

b. Two heads are better than one, partnering with someone has shown me that I
don't have the god-like monopoly on good ideas that I once thought I did.

------
crasshopper
1\. To keep your head on straight.

2\. To share the work.

------
rokhayakebe
Besides the moral support, there is just too much to do.

------
chailatte
Most people are too weak (in heart, passion, time, money) to handle a web
startup by themselves. Some can. Figure out what kind of person you are, then
go for it.

