
Will single founders please stand up? - epi0Bauqu
http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2010/01/will-single-founders-please-stand-up.html
======
grellas
It is important not to be dogmatic on this issue.

Startups come in all shapes and sizes and there is plenty of room in there for
single-founder companies. I have represented at least one single-founder
company that eventually grew to $16B valuation in the fiber optics space and
another that grew to $1B valuation in consumer electronics software. Are these
unusual exceptions to the rule? Sure. But they do exist and there are
undoubtedly a reasonable percentage of successful startups like them that
start in just this way.

The startup process is best viewed as a continuum, ranging from the very early
formative steps to much-more sophisticated steps later on. At some point along
the continuum it is essential for most successful startups to add other team
members because, when you scale to something great, you basically can't do it
alone. But no one says this teaming process has to occur as the absolute first
step in the process. It can occur later and, indeed, much later (both of the
multi-B companies I mention above were several years into the process before
the sole founders brought in other key team players).

The key at the beginning is founder credibility, whether found singly or in a
team. If someone is sharp enough, he will find the means eventually to add key
people even though, at inception, he finds himself working all alone.

Having said that, I will be the first to say that it takes a pretty
exceptional founder to be able to start alone and build to large success. But
many such founders exist and they can rank right up there with other founders
in all the qualities that count toward success. At least that has been my
direct experience in having worked with a broad range of founders over many
years.

------
DanielBMarkham
I'm another single founder. I spent a lot of time looking for cofounders but
after a few months without success I decided it was better to create
something, even if it wasn't an optimum setup, than to keep spending energy
playing matchmaker.

I've found that people have wildly different ideas about both the reason to do
a startup, how to execute, what's important, and where to exit. There's a
great diversity even among people who know/read a lot about it. In fact, I'm
amazed that the multiple founder system works at all. Except for cases where
everybody is a college friend or something, it looks like a recipe for a lot
of conflict.

~~~
RK
Maybe there needs to be an eHarmony.com for finding co-founders.

~~~
alain94040
<http://fairsoftware.net/find-cofounders-for-your-startup> and
<http://www.meetup.com/Co-Founders-Wanted-Meetup/> are dedicated to finding
co-founders. The first one is for worldwide online, the second link is for
Silicon Valley in person.

(I'm behind both)

~~~
davidw
Starting a company has been compared to getting married, and while plenty of
people have met their future spouses on dating sites, they don't meet, talk a
few times, and then get hitched. Perhaps the missing bit is finding something
people can work on for a while without the commitment of a company (sort of
like dating...).

~~~
yummyfajitas
_...while plenty of people have met their future spouses on dating sites, they
don't meet, talk a few times, and then get hitched._

This is true only of American dating sites. A number of Indian dating sites
are based on that exact model.

I guess the lesson to take from that is this: if your expectations are low
enough, and social pressures not to quit are strong enough, any reasonable
pairing can be made to work.

------
dangrossman
I've been a single founder for 6 years now. I've created half a dozen webapps
and products in that time, some of which were eventually sold and others I
still run today. I've never raised money -- a few VCs have contacted me but I
knew there was no chance I'd be what they were looking for. I pay myself well,
I work relatively little and outsource to contractors any work that makes
sense to get help with. I used to do everything myself, but learning to give
up a little control is a good thing.

<http://www.awio.com>

~~~
mishmax
Can you tell us a little more on what type of work you outsource and where you
get your contractors from?

~~~
dangrossman
Mostly graphic design work. I pay designers for uncoded website and logo
designs, advertising creatives and occasionally small graphics. I used to do
the design myself, but I'm not very artistic and a good designer produces
better work in far fewer hours, so I'm willing to pay for it. I've run some
design contests on 99designs.com and keep in touch with the winning designers
for future work, and also met some people through the SitePoint forums.

------
edw519
Single founder on my 4th start-up, my first alone.

#1 - Two of us. A package for specialty manufacturers. I wrote the software,
he sold and implemented it. We agreed to make it a product business, but he
sold it as a service. Totally different animals. We were always behind and had
no chance of building any equity that way.

#2 - Four of us. A package for continuous manufacturers. I was one of 2
programmers along with a designer/analyst and a business guy. I should have
been spending all of my time programming, but I spent 75% of it refereeing
among the other 3. I kissed the ground when I left.

#3 - Two of us. A package for job shops. Things were just taking off when he
died.

#4 - I'm taking everything I've learned from the other businesses and from my
customers over the years and writing a self-service web app that builds
enterprise quality systems for small & medium businesses. Single founder is
the default. I'd gladly have a co-founder or two, but only if the fit is
(almost) perfect. One of the many reasons I came to hn was the possibility of
meeting co-founder(s). Who knows, it still may happen...

~~~
j_baker
Your cofounder _died_? Wow, that must have been rough.

------
chris123
More single-founder stories: Overture (Bill Gross), eBay (Pierre Omidyar),
Napster (Sean Fanning), Lycos (Michael Mauldin), Amazon (Jeff Bezos), AOL
(William von Meister), Digg (Kevin Rose).

Source: "If you’re going to launch a startup, how many friends do you need?":
[http://buzzpal.wordpress.com/2008/01/06/if-youre-going-to-
la...](http://buzzpal.wordpress.com/2008/01/06/if-youre-going-to-launch-a-
startup-how-many-friends-do-you-need/)

~~~
breck
Berkshire Hathaway/Warren Buffett. (Though the name at first was not BH)

~~~
cynicalkane
You're probably thinking of Buffett Partnership, an investment fund which he
ran largely by himself, using friends' and family money as initial capital.

Berkshire Hathaway is a textile mill that Buffett turned into an investment
company, but by then he had been a successful investor for over 10 years.

~~~
breck
I'm talking about the fund that he used to buy BH with.

------
kapitti
Wasn't balsamiq (Peldi) a single founder? I've founded a few startups as a
single founder, but they'd most likely be classified as Micro-ISV's instead of
startups. But I'm okay with that.

~~~
JesseAldridge
He's married and I'm pretty sure his wife plays at least a peripheral role in
the company... So, sort of(?)

------
dennykmiu
My first startup I was the sole Founder and I had a number of early employees.
I was the prime mover and I was the one who had the most stock. Until we were
funded, their salaries were paid with my savings. My second startup I was the
Founder but I had a bunch of early employees who were called co-Founders. I
was still the prime mover but no one was getting paid until we started to ship
products. We basically had equal amount of stock even though I started the
company first and I took risk when no one else would. My experience is that it
was a lot harder to get VC fundings when there were large number of co-
Founders. VC's are not company builders and in order to ensure timely
execution towards a financially successful exit, they would have no problem
firing the Founder(s). So in some way, having a large number of co-Founders is
sub-optimal (for the VC's).

------
inovica
I was a single founder when I started in 1994. Since then, I have had several
businesses - none of them have been $10m businesses, but they have brought in
great income. I grew two of them and then installed managers to take them
forward - I still own them. Some thoughts from me:

1) I tried co-founders, but found that they didn't work as hard as me. Most
people like to be lazy, so finding someone with the same work-ethic is
difficult

2) I want to make decisions quickly and having a co-founder could slow that
down for me

3) Employ people quickly who can help you. You don't need to give up part of
your business to get good people. What motivates people is not just money -
its often pride in a good job, good working conditions etc. I always run a
very flexible in terms of time that people work. They work when they want and
always get the job done

4) Don't be afraid to fire people. There are "givers" and "takers". I always
fire takers as soon as I recognize them.

~~~
adrianwaj
"Taker!?! Fired!"

"And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you — ask
what you can do for your country."

~~~
inovica
Yeah, plainly spoken I know, but true :) Well, true from my experiences
anyway!

------
Tawheed
Single founder here. But I'll admit it: I can use as much support as I can get
sometimes.

I've been thinking of starting a "braintrust" of solo entrepreneurs so that we
can pursue our respective passions but also reap some of the benefits of
having a co-founder, by sharing ideas, debating stuff, etc.

Anyone interested in joining?

~~~
fizx
There's a couple of these already in progress, but you usually have to get
introduced to them via your network. Ask around :)

~~~
Tawheed
I'd rather start my own ;)

~~~
codyrobbins
I’m in. We have to meet at a scotch bar in NYC, though ;)

~~~
Tawheed
Deal!

------
ww8520
How I started my company is kind of funny. While talking to my friend, I had
this idea I thought was great. I tried to sell it to him and asked him to
develop it, but his heart was in doing another project, his own idea. I told
him, it's not hard at all; let me show you. He was still not interested. I
proceeded to do a design and built a prototype. One thing led to another, it
became my product and my company.

------
maxklein
To be a single founder, you need to be quite special. Most people are not that
special. A lot of those who _think_ they are that special, actually are not.

It's not smarts you need - it's self organisational ability, and most people
lack that if there is nobody else watching them.

~~~
gcheong
If you cannot self-organize then you likely would not make a very good co-
founder either. I do not want to be the co-founder who needs watching over nor
would I want to have a co-founder that needed me to watch over them. It's all
external motivation and that's the worst kind.

------
betterlabs
I couldn't agree more. I have been a Cofounder (with 4 others) once and a
single founder twice (all 3 companies are profitable and alive). Based on my
experience, I feel convinced that "unless" you start together as cofounders,
its just very difficult/rare to "find" a cofounder who works out. There are a
variety of reasons and I have seen some in my attempts at looking for one.

Being a single founder is tough, but for those who can do it , it can work
really well. There are some strategic downsides to it like decision making is
based on just the single founder's gut/knowledge/experience, and its important
that single founders understand the downsides and work around them.

------
Aegean
I am a single founder because I don't think I would find a founder that would
work equally harder, and have equally deep experience on the subject or simply
be equally relentlessly resourceful.

I found that the only thing that makes me significantly upset in the startup
is people I deal with. Working with another founder I bet would create a lot
of conflicts.

------
gkoberger
This is a bit unrelated, however I once heard a quote regarding co-founders:

"Even when there are multiple founders, somebody is in charge"

Co-founders don't necessarily mean "equals." You can have co-founders that are
less involved than yourself (still giving you the value of a co-founder,
without requiring them to be equally as invested as yourself).

Another thing to think about is ownership of the idea- almost by definition,
the person who comes up with the idea will be the most involved. If you're
looking for a co-founder, it will be much easier if you don't yet have an
idea, and come up with one together.

------
crocowhile
It would be nice to see a table with HN members and their startups next to
them. Does anything like this exist?

~~~
jeromec
There was a thread called "What are you working on?" here
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1032699> and someone suggested the topic
come up periodically, which I thought was a great idea. Even better, I think,
would be if pg would add a 'Projects' link up top and the projects of members
could be listed. The list might be sorted by vote, or perhaps randomly, and
refreshed daily.

~~~
crocowhile
This is a brilliant idea.

------
morphle
I'm now a single founder (again). I also was a single founder with the first
three startups I did. I keep trying out cofounders, but they all seem to lack
perseverance. Most also have difficulty understanding the tech. I would
welcome a business cofounder any day. Email me if you are interested.

------
ashishk
I'm a single founder. Thinking about crossing over to the dark side, but it's
not such a bad life. You keep more control of the company, but things move
slower as a result.

~~~
axod
Why not just wait until you can employ someone? :)

~~~
nfnaaron
Please, would experienced someones address this question?

For example, the essential difference between a co-founder and employee #1,
and why you might want the one to perform some set of duties rather than the
other.

~~~
rythie
Axod is mentioned in the article and his site, mibbit.com has over 100k
uniques on compete. Are you saying he is in-experienced?

~~~
axod
Compete makes it look bad! <http://www.quantcast.com/mibbit.com> FTW :)

I haven't employed anyone, but I'd say if the only thing you need is to 'speed
up' as OP says, employing someone is probably the way to go. If you're still
feeling your way around finding traction then maybe a cofounder. But this is
just my 2c.

~~~
rythie
Yeah I need to get on quantcast.com too, the Nov/Dec numbers are way off for
me.

------
sid-
Finding a co-founder who matches your views and passion on all the points
mentioned above to a reasonable degree is as hard as finding the mythical
soulmate. Maybe someone can have a startup like eHarmony (eCoFounder?) for
finding such like minded people.

~~~
axod
It's sort of worse. With relationships, if you break up, you move on, find
another mate. You get over it. Once you're sure they're "the one", _then_ if
you like you can do a family startup and create some babies.

But with a startup, you don't usually have any time before you start building
something. So if something does go wrong, the split up is bad.

It'd be like having a baby with every one of your ex girlfriends :/

I think ideally founders should have already worked together on something.

~~~
philwelch
The best idea may be to consciously "date" your co-founders by working with
them on side projects, possibly open source.

~~~
dnsworks
This prospect is just scary to me. Personally I'd be looking for a co-founder
as driven to succeed as I am. I've sat down with 1/2 dozen potential co-
founders for one of my projects and have decided to go it alone because of
this. I'm building a company to make money, not to give away the fruits of my
labor.

------
barmstrong
This comment on the article summed it up nicely for me:

"I always thought it was contradictory that venture investors call out
"conflict between founders" as the #1 reason for startups failing, yet they're
always very reticent about funding a single-founder startup."

------
david927
David Lean, the great film director, said you can only have one director on
any film or you risk diluting the vision.

I think the same is true for creative startups. I find that getting employees
and giving them stock and calling them 'co-founder' is all fine as long as
there's no confusion that they're to follow my lead.

I think you can argue that all great startups are, in a sense, single founder
startups. Woz for Apple, Gates for MS, etc.

~~~
medianama
Woz for Apple... Really?

~~~
ynniv
Hell no! Woz and Jobs definitely co-founded Apple and build the Apple II. Woz
never would have created a polished product on his own, and Jobs has never
directly contributed to engineering. But you hire a lot of additional
engineers, and not so many additional visionary leaders. Woz became less
instrumental over time. As early as the first Macintosh release, Apple had
become more Jobs than Woz, but that isn't saying much since Jobs soon left the
company.

~~~
david927
The Apple II had little in terms of "polish". Back then it was just about the
technology, and the Apple II had it in spades. The Mac was more Jobs than Woz,
but as I mentioned, the Mac was almost stolen outright from Xerox PARC.

 _visionary leaders_

Can you tell me what vision Jobs added to the Apple II?

~~~
ynniv
Woz' retelling in Triumph of the Nerds (pbs.org/nerds) was that he had little-
to-no self-confidence while working on the Apple I. The Apple I itself was a
wooden box full of parts, barely suitable for a hobbyist, used to play simple
games. The Apple II had a proper stylish case (with fancy logo),
documentation, advertising, and a vision of a platform for personal computing
to compete with the mainframe. It was a salable product, and extremely
successful.

 _Mac was almost stolen outright from Xerox PARC_

Also incorrect. The Xerox Star was an expensive prototype used for research.
Many ideas were taken from the Star, but while the first Macintosh looks a lot
like a modern computer, the Star was quite different, even having windows that
couldn't overlap and other things we would now consider silly.

But, Jobs didn't create the Macintosh - he just hired the engineers who worked
on the Star to join his great engineering team to polish and productize it.
His contribution has always been to set the bar and only allow things that are
great into the final product. This is possibly the most important thing an
executive can do, but rarely properly executed.

Cringely did a good job with Triumph of the Nerds (based on his book
"Accidental Empires") - if you haven't seen it, I'm pretty sure that you can
find it on YouTube.

~~~
david927
Woz says that because he's a sweet guy. There's no right or wrong answer here,
but I can tell you _I was there_ and no one cared what color the case was. The
Apple II was a genius product for reasons that had NOTHING to do with: the
case, the logo and the advertising. I'm sorry. Woz may be nice about it but
historians will remember Steve Jobs as "the guy standing next to Woz in the
photos."

~~~
ynniv
_The Apple II was a genius product for reasons that had NOTHING to do with:
the case, the logo and the advertising._

Well, yes... but there are many things that are genius that I have never heard
of. And plenty that I know of that will never be well known.

 _no one cared what color the case was_

Well, Jobs did. As a programmer with some depth, I know how little engineers
care about product development and marketing. Great things sell themselves,
right? I used to agree, but after seeing the waste of unwanted products and
the tragedy of unused pearls, I can no longer believe the Field of Dreams
mantra (If you build it, they will come). The guts of the Apple II didn't sell
themselves, and the color of the case _does_ matter to buyers. Certainly it
was a feat of engineering that would have been impossible without Woz. I also
think that it would have been a forgotten player without Jobs.

------
jhg
A friend of mine did hamachi.cc from start to the point where it was acquired
by another company with 4 million users. That took 1.5 years. He did
everything - the UI design, coding network interface drivers, the server,
marketing, support, ecom site and business development. So, yeah, it's doable,
and, yeah, the workload is ungodly, and, no, he didn't _want_ a co-founder.

------
fleaflicker
There are pluses and minuses.

I think emotional stability is the most important personality prerequisite.

Some advantages:

\- Zero communication overhead so you're more efficient.

\- Huge incentive to automate daily maintenance tasks.

\- You know the codebase inside out and can make massive changes (you
understand the entire system). But that kind of thinking has also led me to
screw up spectacularly so be careful.

------
JangoSteve
I'm a single founder as well. I've learned the hard way that even those who
initially seem to have the same drive and capabilities as I do usually don't
in the long-run.

I started my first two companies alone, then started a third as a partnership
with three others where I was a silent partner, then closed down my first
company, then brought in a co-founder for my second company and renamed it,
then took over the third company (the partnership) through buy-outs, then
desolved my partner for the second (renamed) company.

It's kind of confusing, but the punchline is that every single co-founder who
I at one time had a lot of confidence in has not held up their end (all of
them admitting they hadn't at one point or another).

That being said, I would love to start a company with someone who shares my
drive and capability.

------
vaksel
Nothing wrong with being a single founder, a 1 founder business with 40K in
profit is already ramen profitable. A 2-3 founder business with 40K in profit
is not.

------
dmillar
I'm a single founder. I fall in the "tech cofounder" and would welcome a
"business cofounder" any day. And, speaking of which, find me if you'd be
interested.

------
Sukotto
I think the Smart Bear guy was a single founder too.

(edit: His name is Jason Cohen)

~~~
rphlx
CodeReviewer is one of the slowest/buggiest crap developer tools on Earth,
largely due to its reliance on windows file sharing. It's often using 40% CPU
for no reason, sometimes does not notify on new reviews, goes unresponsive
every 2-3 days, etc.

Purely from an FU-money-exit point of view, I suppose SB was successful. But
IMO that guy seriously needed a good technical cofounder.

------
morphle
What a lot of single founders are out there! I am pleasantly supprised. I
would dare predict that the first company to successfully compete with
Ycombinator will be the one that does (truly) accept single founders.

------
bestes
I'm also single founder. I've spent quite a bit of time looking for a co-
founder and would like a co-founder, but at this point, I figure I just need
to ship something and worry about it later.

------
fizx
Single founder, and damn it's tough. :)

------
prakash
Interestingly, there seems to be a higher percentage of single founders in the
MicroISV type of companies.

------
prakash
patio11/Patrick is another single founder.

~~~
Sukotto
But he's also unusual in other ways. He never quit his day job and he doesn't
live in any of the major technology areas.

(He's also remarkably forthright about his experiences and finances...
something I find really motivating)

------
matt1
I'm a sole founder and I'd love to have a smart, hardworking cofounder. I'm a
nights and weekends coder and will likely remain so until it makes sense to go
full time.

I'm currently developing (with Rails) a timeline app called Preceden, which
will compete with more established timeline sites like Dipity and Lifeblob.
I'm in the Philly area, but I'm shooting for the Bay Area in a few years. If
you're interested in talking, you can find details in my profile.

P.S. We really need a central place for this.

------
thinkbohemian
Single founder working on <http://www.whyspam.me> right now.

I like knowing how to do EVERYTHING that has anything to do with my
application. I do design, coding, sysadmin, marketing, feedback studies. Its
been a fun experience, but hopefully this will give me some street cred so i
don't have to do it again. Maybe someone could do an article on best sources
to outsource areas of web development in the future.

As far as i'm concerned my site development has been _free_ yes i have to pay
server costs, etc. but i haven't had to outsource or hire anyone to do
anything else yet. True i've spent quite a few of my own man-hours on the
project but i consider the lessons learned and experience gained more than
payback for that time.

I think being a single founder can be great if you're just getting started,
and your idea is manageable, the lessons you learn will be invaluable. That
being said, in the future, I would like to be able to produce more in less
time, and having some extra help would be very nice, especially now that I
know what I'm doing!

------
johnrob
Getting users is just as hard building a product. In a way it's harder,
because it is very easy to put energy into product that should have gone to
user acquisition. The biggest weakness of being a single founder is that you
can't put 100% effort into getting customers (since you're distracted by
building the product).

------
minalecs
To find someone to devote free time to more work, to reach the end goal that
maybe months down the line is hard to do. I've been approached by others to
join their side projects, but I would rather work on my own and I think this
is maybe how a lot of people feel. Any other founders in this predicament as
well ?

------
rwhitman
I started a startup first, found a cofounder who subsequently completely
ditched out when the economy sank us and we ran low on cash. Been running the
product on fumes by myself ever since

Though I've admittedly almost burned out on it. I certainly understand why
almost all my advisors insist on the necessity of a cofounder. When you hit
the lows and there's no one there to balance off of you can just hit rock
bottom. I think a lot of the single founder success stories are guys that had
a lot in their favor when they started.

But maybe its also harder to kill a company when there's only one person. Like
the business currently makes nothing but I could keep it alive as a hobby for
4 years and then sink money into it again when things change. Thats an
advantage that a lot of startups don't have or think about, "slow cooking"...

------
jpao79
I have a fairly solid startup idea that I would like to pursue. Is it better
to take the leap (i.e. should I give my 2 weeks notice from my current job),
create a rough prototype of the product and then try to find co-founders based
on the prototype? Or is better for me to try to find a co-founder that I can
convince to help me with the idea and then take the leap (i.e. quit day job)
to develop the prototype. What's hard for me is that without a 80% working
prototype to share with potential co-founders, it's much harder to convince
them that the concept is valid via power point slide decks, etc. From
reviewing some history on Mint, it seems like Aaron Patzer went solo first,
and then convinced people to join him based on his prototype. Are there other
success stories like his?

~~~
SapphireSun
It might be a better idea to make a at least a specification/business plan
first without quitting since it will force you to really think through the
idea. There are always facets you may have missed that could kill it (or
convince you even more). If you decide to take a leap... you have a spec!

------
ww8520
I'm a single founder, done all the work in product development, marketing, and
sales. It's not bad at all.

------
fjabre
I was a single founder for a while. I farmed out a few projects and just
happened to find a good coder and good person to start a company with..

Maybe it's something that should just happen organically? Has anyone met a
cofounder at a mixer or cofounder matching site that worked out well?

------
chrischen
Me! while i always try to find someone to help me on my projects, it really is
difficult to find someone as passionate a founder as I am. But I never let
that fact stop me from doing what I do. It's also forced me to become
technical.

------
niels
Personally I much prefer to be a single founder. If you have the technical
skills, the rest can be learned. Not saying the business side of a startup is
less important, just that it is easier and quicker to learn.

~~~
coderdude
I'd be willing to bet that if you geeked-out on 'business' you'd find it's a
much deeper subject than it appears to be from the perspective of a tech guy
alone.

------
raffi
It can work out, but it's a long road.
[http://blog.afterthedeadline.com/2009/09/08/after-the-
deadli...](http://blog.afterthedeadline.com/2009/09/08/after-the-deadline-
acquired/)

------
larsberg
Ha! I first thought this meant "unmarried" rather than "unpartnered."

~~~
ryanelkins
Same here. I clicked through thinking "Wow, I always thought most founders
were single and being married made me a minority."

------
aohtsab
I've been struggling as to whether finding the right co-founder for my startup
is worth the effort.

I think I'm going to stick it out on my own, at least for now.

EDIT: I originally said I was "on the verge" of bringing out my startup, but
the language bothered me. I've given myself a two-week deadline to get the Web
site off the ground, and a bit more time after that to get the business
actually running. HN taught me I should push myself to get the startup moving,
or it'll never happen, and that's what I'm doing now. =)

------
rs
Single founder here (on xp-dev.com)

It can be really, really, tough at times (I remember being on the verge of
pulling my hair out a few months ago), and it can get a little lonely, but I
decided to go solo as I really didn't find anyone that could had the same
level of ambition and resonated well with my personality. though that can
change in the future. thinking about a couple of new ideas that I will be
looking for co-founders.

------
nvasilak
Another one here. But I'd love to have a cofounder that could bring something
else to the table.

Maybe we should start a list of companies interested in finding cofounders?

------
kylebragger
I've founded a few small things on my own (done.io probably the most recent,
and working on something called Forrst now). Something I've noticed is that
while it's great just executing on stuff by myself, it can be a very lonely
place, and it's definitely easier to slack or give up on something without
someone else depending on you.

------
jhancock
I'm a single founder: by circumstance of location, self-funding, age, and
family. I do understand why investors prioritize investment into startups with
co-founders. I suppose if I was splashing money around, I'd do the same.

I have been through enough to learn to engineer my startup plans to the
resources I have.

------
Concours
single founder working on the COD Network under <http://www.mcsquare.me> , I
never knew how hard it could be, sure I've read it before but never could I
imagine it's this hard. You have to do everything, blog pitch, SEO , hacking,
bug tracking , monetisation strategy, design , and and and.....this is my
first startup, so I learn many things the hard way and it's mostly a learn by
doing. I'd gladly have a co-founder sometimes...I just entered the beta and
I'll probably at some point need someone to help me, but I guess I won't name
him co-founder.

------
yoav
Single founder here. <http://Ear-Drum.org> \- an RIA to truly engage in rich
music immersion; promotion, collaboration, education, and community.

I spent two years waiting for technology to catch up, refining the concept and
business model according to how the industry was changing, and it's changed a
lot. Just launched the beta a couple weeks ago.

Being a single founder has forced me to engage and figure out how each segment
in the company functions. You're doing everything so when you grow and start
hiring people you'd have developed deeper insights into how to manage them,
what kind of results you should expect and what challenges they face.
Experiencing the nitty gritty of every facet of your business is crucial - I
believe, to steer the ship competently. It's not just about knowing the people
but the shoes you're asking them to fill and being a single founder there's no
option but to learn that, especially on days you'd otherwise just pass the
task off to someone else or share the burden. Innovation comes out of
struggle.

But it is a rollercoaster and it's equally important to have people in your
life to pick you up when you hit the wall, and knock you down when you get too
cocky. If those people can't relate to or can't appreciate the work you're
doing then a lot of that support can be lost unless you can relate it to them
and figure out how to get feedback. Being able to sell your idea to people
outside your niche is a valuable skill to master in itself.

As for me, the beta testers and other musicians tend to be hugely passionate
and supportive, but that source of inspiration might be limited to my
particular product. People might not get as excited at you when you're working
on postagestamplickers.com. It's important to tell people what you're doing
and discuss your idea with as many people as possible. It's both motivating
and good for spotting holes in your bucket. I'm a firm believer in doing over
talking, but when you're cold, tired, and lonely you'll be glad you're on a
solid path and took the time to store some enthusiasm away for the hard times.

I'm not explicitly for or against being a single founder, but in my case
gaining a deep understanding of the company as a living breathing organism
from every possible vantage point is absolutely the most important thing,
which when it comes down to it, is about creating something organically and
moving forward pragmatically. It keeps you from taking steps you're not ready
to handle. If I had a co-founder certain things would be more fluid, but I'd
miss out on a bunch of raw experience that will shape how I lead and venture
in the future.

------
alanthonyc
Me. I'm working on my first, looking for help, but that good match is hard to
find.

So, are we going to do something about this (like a support group or
something) this or will this just die out after this thread?

------
davidw
I work on my own, although I'm not really working in 'startup mode' at the
moment. More doing consulting as a day job and testing out various ideas to
see if any of them stick.

------
shpxnvz
I am a single founder, though my wife helps on occasion.

I do try to get as much advice and input from friends and colleagues as I can,
so in all honesty I'd have to say it's a team effort.

------
10ren
_point of view is worth 80 IQ._

More founders == more points of view. If some of them coincide with the
customers' points of view, so much the better...

------
cmalpeli
I too am a single founder - my site/business is <http://www.podfeed.net>

------
dhpmx
I'm a single founder - my site/business is <http://www.vivapixel.com>

------
aresant
This thread reminds me of a quote a friend of mine says "If partners are so
great, why didn't God have one?"

~~~
plesn
Well, depends on the religion.

(As an atheist, I'm still looking at my screen and waiting for my app to self-
generate...)

~~~
aaronblohowiak
Hence the interest in genetic programming ;)

Edit: Most systems seem to lack any sort of intelligent design

------
pixcavator
I am a single founder. Still keep my day job (tenure is a beautiful thing!).

------
adrianwaj
If you're a single founder, chances are the co-founder you'd take on most
readily is another single founder.

------
curtisspope
Curtiss P AisleFinder.com

------
barnaby
Isn't "single founder" just a result of not being able to get others to join
your effort?

~~~
jcl
No! You could also be too greedy to share or too mistrustful to believe others
won't screw up your idea.

Seriously, why so negative? It's not like five are necessarily better than
two.

------
gills
Aye.

------
authentic
single founder, for the simple reason that i like to be in control.

imho, it is always a mistake to make somebody not strictly necessary for the
business a founder. dishing out vanity co-founder titles at employee level
equity stakes is debatable.

------
johnpratt
I thought it was too hard to start a company with a single founder because
Paul Graham said so. That guy knows everything about start ups. He is possibly
the greatest entrepreneur of all time and didn't benefit from a bubble or
anything. Anybody more successful than pg only got there due to luck.
Everybody involved with start ups should just read everything he writes,
conform to it, and help spread the word. You can't become a trailblazer until
you embrace this dogma.

~~~
david927
This deserves the down votes because it's a little more smirky than funny, but
there's a valid point here.

YC has has been called a cult before, and I don't think anyone would argue
that there are some eccentricities, and one of these is the over-valuing of
the two founder model.

 _You can't become a trailblazer until you embrace this dogma._ That's a great
line, actually, and says it all.

