
Ask HN: How to fire your co-founder? - mesogamer
So I just read this HN posted article (The 7 Habits of Highly Overrated People - https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=6965295) and thought a lot about my co-founder who is doing jack shit in the company. I already talked to him about lowering his share options (which he currently holds  about 40%, (same as me, after seed round dilution)), but with no avail. He actually threatens the company&#x27;s success if I ever try to &quot;sneak a move&quot; on him when in reality his contributions are near 0 for product development as well as S&amp;M.<p>If I talk with my boards on his misbehaviour it will get them stressed and stop believing on the company. Is there really no way to fire him and the only way is to actually quit ?
======
badclient
_If I talk with my boards on his misbehaviour it will get them stressed and
stop believing on the company_

Sorry dude, looks like that is precisely what you are going to have to do.
Don't worry about the board stressing; they can handle it. That's their job.

Focus on YOUR job: the success of the company. The board will stop believing
you when you prolong this longer than you should have, _actually_ making the
situation much worse.

When you go to the board, GO PREPARED. Assume the board does not know
anything. And treat it almost like a trial where you will get to present your
side, and at some point, your co-founder will get to present his. In these
cases, I like to open up a document and put down the facts in bullet points.
When presenting, remain calm and stick to the facts, which when evaluated by a
sensible party(your board), should have them arrive at the same conclusion as
you.

~~~
mesogamer
Thanks for the advice. I might go with this one after holiday ends. The only
problem I see here is that he has more rapport with them (since I'm more
product oriented and he's money oriented).

It's going to get real messy, especially since he holds all money, bank,
passwords info (now I understand why he wanted to take control of those stuff
in the beginning). Firing him will be so messy, and the 3 employees we have
today respect him a lot especially since he's an expert following those rules
in the article I stated in the original post (he's even deceived me lot's of
times!)

shit.. Sometimes I think I need a new startup problem to solve to leave the
company because this is not letting me sleep at night (and it's no longer the
first thought when waking up in the morning).

~~~
blazespin
"the 3 employees we have today respect him a lot"

This is a big red flag. Who hired those people? Why did you agree to hire them
if you don't respect their judgement? Or is your co-founder also doing all the
hiring as well as taking care of everything else?

Starting to sound like you should be asking yourself what you contribute.

~~~
splintercell
I am seeing this red flag here too. This is sounding a bit ridiculous. It
seems to me if the other guy is the money guy and OP is the product guy, and
the employees, board, logistics are all in the hand of the money guy, then he
is doing precisely his job.

What does OP really want his cofounder to do, maybe its time he explains why
is he an 'overrated' person.

------
swombat
I would certainly not take such drastic action based on pattern recognition
built out of some HN article.

Would you file for divorce based on an HN article about overrated spouses?

As others have pointed out, it sounds like he does do a fair bit for this
company but you're blind to it. The one trick he's clearly missed is getting
to this level of distrust with his cofounder. For that, though, it is not
clear that you should fire him. Maybe he should fire you...

~~~
gtCameron
Could not agree more. You are not thinking of firing your co-founder, you are
thinking of divorcing him.

No matter what its going to be messy, and you need to be absolutely sure its
worth going down that road before you do it.

------
georgespencer
I'm in the uncommon position of having actually had to do this. It wasn't a
"firing" per se as much as a parting of ways which I initiated, but here's
what I learned:

• Discuss it very frankly with at least one board member you trust. Depending
on their involvement with the business they may already suspect that something
is wrong. Outline to this board member your concerns that Co-Founder is going
to take this the wrong way and derail the business.

• Discuss with Co-Founder the specific areas you feel Co-Founder isn't pulling
his weight (it isn't okay, even if it's the truth, to say "he isn't doing
anything"). Make an irreducible list: start with what are obviously his
strengths, and then list the ways in which he is not playing to them. Make it
inarguable and prevent it from turning into a personal matter.

• Keep the focus on company not him. For the company to succeed, you need to
accomplish XYZ.

• Explain very clearly what his options are. You are not trying to screw him,
but you are displeased with his input. You would like to amicably resolve this
so that the board doesn't have to be involved, but failing that you will take
it to the board and ask them to do their job by sorting it out. He can accept
reduced equity and no day-to-day involvement, or he can kick up a fuss and you
will move him on. Either way he should accept the reality that his involvement
is coming to an end and that his decision now is how it ends.

Your board, if they have any kind of experience in running a business
whatsoever, will know that this is one of a billion things which will go
"wrong" over the four or five years it will take to make or break your biz.
You can influence a lot in the way you communicate this event to them. It
sounds to me like it's not truly a crisis but a significant opportunity for
you to offload someone who is not contributing and reallocate capital to
someone who will put in the hours.

My overriding advice is that you should not worry about this. Next time you
start a company be sure to finalise your divorce before you finalise your
marriage (i.e. very clearly delineate duties for founders and establish what
success for your roles looks like), but other than running out of capital or
not growing, very few things are disastrous for a startup.

------
DanielRibeiro
I'm sorry to hear about this.

Elad Gil[1] has written about this in depth about 12 months ago:
[http://blog.eladgil.com/2013/01/how-to-fire-co-
founder.html](http://blog.eladgil.com/2013/01/how-to-fire-co-founder.html)

[1] [https://angel.co/eladgil](https://angel.co/eladgil)

------
al2o3cr
"when in reality his contributions are near 0 for product development as well
as S&M."

What, he won't even hold the whip? ;)

I'm pretty sure that "S&M" above actually refers to "Sales & Marketing", for
anybody else who was... confused on a first read.

~~~
michaelochurch
It's actually BDSM, Business Development, Sales & Marketing.

~~~
primitivesuave
You might want to put those in a different order to not get confused with the
_other_ BDSM.

~~~
gtremper
They actually refer to the same thing.

~~~
jrockway
What's fun about business development, sales, or marketing?

------
logicallee
My take here differs a bit from that of the rest of the thread.

How about this OP - who are you to fire your coworker after he got a cosy
relationship with a board?

This is literally no better than firing an 'idea man' after they did nothing,
except just bring an idea, set up a company around it, and code the first
version.

Who are you to do that? If you were good enough to found and run a company by
yourself, including raising money, you would be doing that. Where are all the
companies you founded and ran by yourself in the years and decades you didn't
have your current cofounder? Even if he showed up to work three days: one day
when he talked with you and then brought a huge investment from a board that
you couldn't bring, then 18 months later to sign some Series A papers with you
after discussing them by email, and the third day he to sign the IPO documents
before quitting, you should still STFU and thank your lucky stars you're
allowed to get 40% of an actual company that he actually orchestrated for/with
you, in exchange for nothing more than working there, much as you might for
whatever salary "S&M" or "product design" is worth.

It's not your co-founder's job to work for you. Who do you think you are
anyway? Go design a product or do sales at a big conglomerate if you want pay
grades, or go found a company by yourself if you don't need the things you've
already listed your cofounder as bringing, including a cozy relationship with
a board.

If you can found a company and raise money for it by yourself, go ahead and
give yourself a 2.5x equity raise up to 100% by getting the fuck out and doing
so. enjoy 100% of what you feel is 100%, since you feel your cofounder didn't
add shit to the mix, in your extremely personally centered opinion.

Everyone else here has it 100% wrong, IMO.

~~~
pnut
I was about to write something similar to this.

So someone with 40% of the company thinks the other guy with equivalent
ownership isn't worth his share? What if that guy thinks the same thing about
you?

The other guy apparently has employee loyalty, funding, and administrative
controls on his side...

I am not at all convinced that the OP deserves sympathy for wanting to screw
his business partner, and publicly soliciting strangers' advice on how to go
about doing it.

If I were the other guy, I'd put this HN comment thread in the hands of my
attorney and take my own case to the board. Sounds like the jig is up for this
partnership, take it out back and put it down.

------
gojomo
Keep in mind that sometimes people misperceive each others' real
contributions, because of differing competencies and priorities. But, assuming
your estimation is correct:

Is an employee agreement and vesting schedule in place?

Who reports to whom? You haven't mentioned formal titles/roles, but unless
you're already final-say CEO, you'll probably need the board's support to oust
him. You'll definitely _want_ their support and advice, especially if
adversarial steps to adjust equity or reorganize are necessary.

Talk to older mentors/lawyers who've seen similar situations.

Look up 'shotgun clause'; even if one doesn't already exist, a 'him-or-me'
game of chicken might be resolvable with minimal damage/legal-risk using some
sort of similar bidding/step-up-or-leave arrangement.

------
greghinch
This is why you have a board. And hopefully some decent legal documentation in
place. Talk to them, lay out facts and the action you want to take, and just
follow the documented process for things like board votes and such (again I
hope you have legal docs in place, otherwise be prepared to get a lawyer and
slog it out…). Sounds like you think the success of your company might depend
on you getting rid of him, so just treat it like what it is: business, not
personal.

~~~
cma
Majority shareholders can't just vote to take away equity from minority
holders. There are laws about minority shareholder rights. The OP better have
some really specific agreements in place.

~~~
greghinch
Well generally with more or less standard docs in place, the board can vote to
remove the offending person from the company. And then it's just a matter of
the vesting schedule as to the leaving person's remaining stake (this is why
founders should have vesting). Not saying there won't be something of a legal
battle, but certainly there's no special provisions necessary which you
wouldn't expect in standard startup articles of incorporation.

------
late2part
Let's see. He's the expert. He controls the money. He has the rapport with the
board. Maybe he helped get a lot of the funding? Sounds like he's pulled a lot
of weight so far.

Maybe he's not pulling the weight, but like a movie the other day, a Washing
Machine works hard, so what.

Think through if he's benefitting the company in his total contribution. If
you want more from him, ask. If he won't do it, explain it's unacceptable and
go to the board.

Like badclient states, it's going to come down to perception based on asserted
facts. Those facts will be interpreted through the lens of relationships.

I have been through this before, I can help if you want someone to bounce
things off of real time.

~~~
jcc80
"Those facts will be interpreted through the lens of relationships."

This is the key point for everyone advising him to go to the board or quit and
start anew with the employees. It's unlikely the board meeting will go well
unless the other cofounder has done something seriously wrong. Trying to work
out goals with him, as suggested, has a better chance of being productive
compared to asking him to reduce his equity.

------
bushido
I apologize in advance, but since nobody else seems to have taken the
initiative I will opt for being the ass_ole in this situation.

Before you go to the board (you ethically should) let ascertain a few things.

Are you sure he's an overrate person or is it just that you don't see the
value in his input?

Some where in the thread you mentioned:

 _> It's going to get real messy, especially since he holds all money, bank,
passwords info_

Some credit needs to go to an individual who has taken ownership for
responsibility of finances, considering the amount of onus that falls on the
need to maintain finances optimally for a start-up, this can also be really
stressful. If he has mismanaged finances, that's another story.

If he has not mismanaged the finances and has taken ownership/charge of these
affairs you need to reflect on why you did not opt to share the burden.

Some people don't like managing finances, nothing wrong with that, but they do
need people who'd do it for them, even better if there is a mutual need to
succeed. Anyone can be the best money manager in hindsight.

 _> the 3 employees we have today respect him a lot especially since he's an
expert_

Respect is very important. Sure, the article says that the Overrated person
can establish themselves as an expert, but believing this without a doubt also
means that you don't trust the judgement of your first three employees.

Not saying you're wrong, but there is a possibility that you need to delve a
little deeper on why they think your co-founder is an "expert".

 _> following those rules in the article_

Not all rules apply all the time. Also these are not really rules but
situational observations.

 _> The only problem I see here is that he has more rapport with them (the
board)._

Was he instrumental in helping you raise funds? Could you have raised the
funds with a 100% surety without him if you were a single founder? Would this
rapport help keep the faith of the stakeholders in the prospect of your
success?

Maintaining and managing peoples belief in an idea or the people executing an
idea is no easy task. Are you sure he has a zero percent contribution in any
of these? And again are you sure you could have achieved a 100% of past
results without him?

 _> He actually threatens the company's success if I ever try to "sneak a
move" on him_

Why would you try to sneak a move past anyone who has as much to loose as you,
or even if it was a fraction thereof?

How does he threaten the company?

Does he threaten to leave? If you want him to leave, this solves your problem.
But, if his leaving threatens the company, you should probably reconsider
firing him.

~~~
raverbashing
This is important

If you want to (you should and must) get to the board and present your
concerns, they are going to need those questions answered

It will only help your case

If your cofounder is as bad as I'm imagining, you should do your homework: get
emails, recordings, etc which is strongly hinted by his threat (make sure you
get him on that, record with your cell phone - hidden - or something)

But there's also a possibility things are merely like this: "some credit needs
to go to an individual who has taken ownership for responsibility of finances,
considering the amount of onus that falls on the need to maintain finances
optimally for a start-up, this can also be really stressful."

You need to work a very clear and ironed out case for the Board. And remember,
to them everything is still ok, and they hold him (and you) in consideration,
so you'll have to work the case real slowly, be tolerant of their questions,
as dumb as they are (it's a dumb question to you, not to them)

And talk to your lawyer, of course. And make sure he doesn't know about this.

~~~
owenmarshall
>make sure you get him on that, record with your cell phone - hidden - or
something

Be _incredibly_ careful: this could be a violation of state
privacy/wiretapping laws.

~~~
a_olt
Yes, what you need to check is whether your country/state requires one party,
or two- (all-) parties consent. See this:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_recording_laws](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_recording_laws)

------
maaku
1\. Watch Startup.com.

2\. Talk to him. Offer him something in return for his shares (such as a large
amount of debt which is only triggered if/when the company sees a liquidation
event of suitable magnitude).

There hopefully will not be a step 3.

~~~
tylerlh
Watch what? The site you're plugging may as well be a parked domain.

~~~
jamiequint
[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0256408/](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0256408/)

~~~
tylerlh
Thanks for that guys. I had no idea this was actually referencing a movie.

------
MediaSquirrel
I was in a similar position with my first company, but waited too long because
we were such close friends. I view failing to fire him as my biggest
mistake/failing as CEO of my first co.

If you want to talk, drop me a line here and we can hop on the phone. I have a
strong opinion on this topic:
[http://mattmireles.com/contact/](http://mattmireles.com/contact/)

------
birken
At the early stage of a company, equity is very important to keep people's
incentives aligned to work really hard in the best interest of the growing the
company. This generally initially expresses itself in the founders, who have a
lot of equity and little or no salary, and then continues on with early
employees. So just from this perspective, spending a ton of equity on somebody
who isn't contributing is a massive opportunity cost.

Additionally, there is a reason successful solo founders are rare. It is hard
to found a company, especially without somebody who is 100% aligned with you
(at least economically) the whole journey. I'd imagine that a situation where
you start with 2 founders and go down to 1* makes it even harder, because you
are like a single founder but with all of this stress you are accumulating
right now on things that aren't related to making a great product.

Now this isn't to say that founder strife is something that doesn't happen in
successful companies. It does. It is just the magnitude and early-ness of your
strife seems pretty large. Making a successful company is really really hard,
and you really want to put yourself in the best position to succeed. If you
aren't in a good situation, and getting to a good situation doesn't seem
likely, then just leaving and starting something else might be your best
available option.

Note: I have no idea how large your company is, so this post is assuming your
company is 2 or 3 people and is very early stage. If your company is doing
really well or is much larger, this advice basically doesn't apply at all,
because then "sticking with it" starts to look like a good option.

*: I'm extrapolating that you had 2 founders based on your post. If for instance you had 4 founders and were going down to 3 I don't think it would be as big a deal.

------
Nord20
Don't forget that just because he is a shareholder doesn't mean he has an
automatic right to be a Director (or employee). Hold a vote of no confidence
in his abilities to add value to the company and fire him as a Director - you
can't take away his shares though, unless you can convince him to sell.

Your first and only duty is to the welfare of your company.

~~~
ry0ohki
Typically (hopefully!) shares are vested based on work as an employee, in
which case you can get back the unvested shares at least.

------
tedmcory
The best way to do it, is to not have to. The second best way, is to fail
fast. I waited too long in my last startup and wasted too much time waiting
for someone to carry their weight. It never gets better.

I recommend reading "The Founder's Dilemma's" to cover the other things you'll
need to consider later as well prevent other, BIGGER, issues.

------
7Figures2Commas
Perhaps what you have _is_ worth fighting for, and you will therefore be
willing to incur significant costs (in time, energy, opportunity and likely
money) battling your co-founder. But I think you should consider the facts you
have presented in your question and responses to other comments:

1\. Your co-founder has the same level of ownership as you.

2\. He controls the company bank account, passwords, etc.

3\. His relationship with the board is stronger than yours.

4\. Your employees like him.

5\. He is aware of your desires and has made it clear he is willing to fight
your efforts, apparently even if it means sabotaging the company.

Given these facts, I think it would be wise for you to consider what you can
_realistically_ achieve even if you are successful in removing your co-
founder. You may find that the question, "How do I fire my co-founder?" is not
the first one you should be asking yourself.

------
thiloberlin
"He actually threatens the company's success if I ever try to "sneak a move"
on him when in reality his contributions are near 0 for product development as
well as S&M."

1) S&M? Sales and Marketing? At some point in the comments you mentioned that
he's the financial guy in your team. I assume because you're writing this on
hacker news you're the product guy. So I assume you're comparing his tasks
with what you do day in day out.

I started a company with three other founders 6 years ago in Berlin. We had
depressing times, but also great times. I left the company a year ago to join
one of our VC and after 5 years I was the first to leave.

During those 5 years, I had moments were my co-founders didn't live up to my
expectations. And the other way around with me. In retrospect I even think
that two of us had a burn-out during the time (which results in exactly the
behavior, described in the article you've mentioned) and because we had
constantly re-invent our jobs.

And during the time were we re-invent our jobs, we're not that productive - or
appear not productive - for some time. Give him that time, you'll need it at
some point too.

2) You've started that company with him and you've raised funds.
Congratulations, because at least your investors are thinking that you are a
strong team - otherwise they wouldn't have invested in the first place.

From your ask and comments it sounds like your relation with your co-founder
seams to be already hostile. For the sake of your company, you have to put
aside feelings and put the interest of the company in front of everything.
Which means your _ego_.

get some consultancy and figure out how to communicate on a professional
level.

Someone mentioned to put up goals. I assume you have some, so try to reach
them. If you don't need them then there is always the option to get another
co-founder - maybe a more senior person - into your company.

Good luck.

------
alan_cx
To look at it the opposite way...

Could you quit and re-start? If you have employees, maybe they quit and follow
you? Perhaps your investors would go with you too.

~~~
ra3
He likely has a clause in the employment agreement preventing him from
competing in any way. Pretty standard

~~~
alan_cx
Well, yes. Except, with his leaving, and assuming all the important people,
etc went with him, what would the remaining co-founder have left to be
competing with?

Then what resources would the remaining co-founder have to go through the US
court system?

Lastly, leaving and re-starting doesn't have to mean the exact same product.

I know what you are saying, but Im pretty sure it could be side stepped with
some creative thinking.

~~~
cma
>Then what resources would the remaining co-founder have to go through the US
court system?

To bet on this would be to bet on the new company being a failure.

Because if it ever _does_ become successful, plenty of lawyers would be
willing to work on behalf of the ousted cofounder on contingency.

------
secondincmd
I was in a similar situation exactly two months ago. As others have stated
here, COMMUNICATE with your cofounder. Express what you are thinking and how
you view the situation. My cofounder didn't. He immediately tried to push me
away from the company and eventually removed me 'without cause'. We are in a
legal battle right now. Even to this day I still don't know what or why he did
what he did.

Communication is key in any relationship. If you can't manup and talk to them,
you are part of the problem.

If after you two talk and there is no movement, then seek out other
alternatives. But always try to keep an open line of communication. Sometimes
the alternative is way too costly.

------
ChuckMcM
I'll reiterate what others have said here, keep notes and keep it all about
the company. It isn't about how effective or overrated your co-founder is, it
isn't about your relative "worth" to the company, it is all about making the
company successful. Stay laser focused on that issue.

Don't talk to board about firing the co-founder, talk to the board about
making the company successful. If that requires replacing the co-founder they
are perfectly capable of figuring that out.

------
mathattack
Lots of good advice. There are people who might say, "This is why you have
think things through better in advance" but your situation is what it is. I'd
also seriously consider whether his bad points could still be good for the
company. (Zuckerberg clearly had an ego.) Also remember there is a cost for
the divorce. If your contribution is 70/30, but you split the money evenly,
the damage from the divorce may still be more than the benefit of finding a
more equitable partner. (He may leave with all his equity, and perhaps some
folks leave with him.)

All that said, here's my advice:

1) You have to be mentally prepared to walk, and go do something else, because
there is a good chance you won't be able to work with this person again. You
also should be prepared to rebuild the company from scratch.

2) If you have a good enough relationship with your co-founder (and one that's
worth preserving) you have to go to them and say, "I think this isn't working.
Can we figure an equitable way out of this?" You may have to be the one that
leaves. You have to be prepared to let him have a large chunk of equity. If
you skip this step, you will have an enemy for life. (You should only skip it
if you already have an enemy for life)

3) After step 2, you should contact the board member that's closest to you and
tell them, "I'm considering moving on. Can we talk?" They will be savvy to
know that something is up, and they can help make the call for which of you
two will stay.

4) No matter what the outcome, conduct yourself professionally at all times.

In the end, the code/passwords/money won't disappear. If your co-founder does
something crazy when there are outside investors, his career is doomed. He may
get angry, and you may get fired, but he won't so overtly steal.

Good luck and let us know how it goes.

------
iquitmyphd
(Sort of disclaimer, this may or may not be terrible advice from a legal
perspective, IANAL)

So first off all, get someone to talk this through. Ideally someone who can
give you an honest opinion, but any second opinion is better than none.

And second, after you decided to use the nuclear option, shelf it as a plan B.
The nice thing is, almost everything is better than that. So you can plan with
a lot more freedom, and you can play with a lot of risk. If it does not work
out, then you just push the button and go nuclear. In your case, when you
decided that there is only one of you left when the dust has settled, then you
don't need to worry how you can work together in the future. One way to
exploit this, you can be brutally honest. Perhaps you find a common basis
again, or you go to your board.

------
skoutlabs
Having gone through this, I would immediately read through your operating
agreement, and any other operating documents. I went through same process,
having numerous well documented discussions with cofounder.

If you wait to long, and your cofounder feels a threat, they may beat you to
the punch.

After doing more than a million in revenue in our first 3 quarters and hiring
a team of 15+, I was fired. A clause in our operating agreement allowed for
this to happen, even with equal equity.

I encourage you to act quickly and very accurately in order to alleviate any
risk of your partner taking action against you.

Good luck. I sincerely wish you the best. As messy as it gets, stay honest,
stick to the points, and don't overreact in your defense. It will all work out
as long as you diligently work to resolve the issue.

------
jbensamo
sorry to be late to the party but this is typically the kind of situation that
requires you to "manage up" your board. DO NOT wait for the board meeting to
address all this. Talk individually to your board members before the board
meeting; present the solutions that you are envisioning and next steps. Ask
for their input - that's how you're gonna make them feel better and confident
that you're on top of the situation. If you go to the board meeting and
present the situation then, there is absolutely no way this results in a
healthy conversation. Everybody will look at you in a wtf-way and it's going
to be very awkward. Prepare your board - so when you get there it's more of a
follow up conversation.

------
penguinlinux
You are trying to throw your cofounder under the bus without going directly to
him first? Tell him whats on your mind. At least you owe him that. At one
point you picked him to be your cofounder and now maybe things are not working
out, it might be his fault, maybe he is having issues or doesn't know he is
not collaborating as much, but you owe him at least a direct conversation man
to man. He will appreciate this more than being thrown under the bus.

again, I don't know the full details of your situation but there is two sides
to a story. Whatever you end up doing won't be pretty but talking is and
discussing things hombre a hombre is the best approach.

------
conformal
funny. i was in this position many moons ago with 50/50 ownership between me
and my partner.

it blows and there is never an easy way to dissolve such relationships. i had
to threaten 'going nuclear', i.e. closing the business, to get him to leave.

------
throwwit
Hustlers gonna hustle... welcome to business 101. Keep documentation. Set
boundaries. Plan! If it's his prerogative to threaten the company's success,
he is effectively diminishing his own returns. If mechanisms exist to oust him
-effectively- in relation to what the company needs, those need to be
implemented. This is why hiring decisions are important. Speak plainly. "Sneak
a move" is unacceptable business language. Also, the marketing guy can't work
with an unfinished product (just to make a point for his behalf).

------
jason_wang
Note to future startup founders: Make sure a vesting schedule is setup.
(Pretty) please!

With a vesting schedule in place, parting with a co-founder (voluntarily and
involuntarily) is much cleaner.

------
coherentpony
Wait until he leaves the office and then do a poo on his desk.

------
alinawab
Talk to someone with experience who is both objective and tough, who can first
tell you if you are in the wrong.

If you convince them of your case, seek their guidance in approaching your
board and other influencers. You should also seek advice from the company's
legal counsel, he is obligated to protect your confidentiality. Also quitting
or firing are not the only two options here, but I'm sure your legal counsel
should know about this type of stuff.

------
bsirkia
That sounds brutal. Do you have anyone that you both trust, like an older
advisor, college professor, etc. that could maybe sit down with both of you
and mediate?

------
pla3rhat3r
Wow! What a shitty situation. If you can't buy him out you're going to have to
get the Board involved so they can act collectively. Get you're shit together
and "build your case" against them so it doesn't blow up in your face. Good
luck!

------
BrandonBradley
I had to let go of my full-time assistant today. The holidays are over; do
what you have to do.

~~~
cpucycling
livin' the dream, brah!

------
edmack
Hey - I've been in exactly this position last October, with a fairly messy
end. We had to give up on the company.

More than happy to talk it through with you and let you know what worked
well/didn't for us. Twitter: @MackMackTweet

------
27182818284
Out of curiosity, are you both technical cofounders doing programming or are
you both overlapping and trying to do sales and marketing? What is that
situation like?

------
raheemm
Here is one way you could structure this. Create goals for him to reach. If he
repeatedly fails to reach them, then you can ask him for compromises such as
giving up equity, etc. If you do it in the right way (that is a win-win,
helping him to make more contribution), then it can be worked out. If he
repeatedly fails, then you can involve your board and work out a solution that
is best for the startup.

~~~
RougeFemme
I agree except that since it's apparently been going on for a while, there's
no time _now_ to allow him to "repeatedly" fail. Ideally, this improvement
plan would have already been attempted and the results of that (assuming there
were repeated failures) could be included in the info provided to the Board.

At this point, he should just go directly to the Board and include his
_proposed_ improvement plan in his presentation. The co-founder has already
indicated an unwillingness to change or leave; the Board should be able to
force it.

------
korg250
How long till the guy (your co-founder) found out about this post?

------
3pt14159
Email me there are some things that people can't tell you publicly on how to
deal with this type of situation.

------
beachstartup
> I already talked to him about lowering his share options (which he
currently holds about 40%, (same as me, after seed round dilution))

if you're a co-founder and all you have is options and not a significant chunk
of real equity, i'd say the problem is not that he isn't pulling his weight,
but you (that's you, not him) got short-changed for the amount of work you are
doing. and you are probably upset about that.

if he's a CFO/money type that's been charged with fund raising, money
management, records, dealing with vendors and HR, etc, his compensation (no
actual equity?) is probably correct, or even under-valued.

in which case, if you go to the board, you are going to be forced into a
position of justifying why you want an increase in compensation for your work,
instead of lowering his compensation for the work he's doing.

these are the kinds of things you learn so that your 2nd and 3rd time around
are easier.

------
almosnow
Just tell him, plain and square:

"When we started on this endeavour I was expecting you to behave/provide/take
care of X and you are not doing those things that we agreed on (or the results
you are delivering are WAY OFF the expectations that the company had on you).
You cannot be part of this if you are not helping it getting better. I'm sorry
but I don't want to continue with our business relationship."

Be honest (with him and with yourself), you DON'T WANT HIM and there's nothing
wrong with it. The more transparent you are here, the better you'll come out
of 'the negotiation'.

The negotiation: Wether you want it or not, he owns some part of the company,
even if he had just been doing jack shit the fact that you invited him to your
endeavour and you are still referring him as a co-founder means that he's
ethically entitled to 'something'. Now, it's up to you to decide what is that
'something' that he deserves'; again, just be honest and talk about what would
be fair for him to take.

Be honest! That's the only rule here and if he co-founded this thing with you
(even though you knew he wasn't worth it, or didn't knew at all) chances are
that you may be real-life pals; if that's the case, just solve it like pals,
after all it's always better to have a friend than a dollar.

