
Ask HN: Do I hide the fact that I am a sole-founder? - mryan
Hi HNers,<p>I am about to put up a landing page for my startup, which is almost ready for a public beta.<p>While writing the marketing copy, I have stumbled across a dilemma on which I would appreciate some input. The landing page includes a brief story, told in the first person, about the problem I am attempting to solve with this site. It occurs to me that some people might be put off by this, and would rather use a service that appears to have a big team behind it. However, I feel a bit uncomfortable with just doing s/I/we/g.<p>I would rather not detail the idea fully just yet (as I am shooting for some exclusive coverage from a popular blog in this space), but it is a tech/game-based site, essentially B2C SaaS for a particular subset of the gaming market. The tech nature of the site makes me worry that people would want/expect a big support team behind it, so showing that I am a single founder might put off some customers.<p>Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Is it better to be 100% open and risk some people not using the service? Or should I change the wording on the site to make it appear as though there is a big team behind the site?<p>TIA for any responses.
======
patio11
Two seconds spent worrying about this issue is two seconds of your life you
will never get back. Use whichever is more pleasing to your ear. Your
customers do not care about this. No really, they don't.

This is almost the canonical question on the Business of Software forums asked
to avoid launching. Don't avoid launching. All good things come from
launching.

~~~
speleding
> Your customers do not care about this. No really, they don't.

Depending on the service, some do actually. I'm the sole founder of an
appointment scheduling SaaS business and I frequently got questions about the
reliability/stability of my company. I lost a few customers who explicitly
expressed concern about the company size when I still had to answer "1" on the
company size question (I've grown since).

I agree with the sentiment that you should just launch anyway, but there will
be customers who pass you by until you're bigger.

~~~
patio11
I have qualified agreement with you for B2B, particularly
B2BigFreakingEnterprise, but B2PoorGamersWhoDoNotPayForAnything does not have
a problem with this. (There is another problem with that market - I may have
left a subtle hint.)

I get the size question with regards to AR, too. A surprising portion are
mollified by a straight answer and mentioning that I've run a software
business with thousands of customers for five years with 99% uptime.

~~~
mryan
Thank you both for your responses. I was actually going to use BCC and AR as
an example - I imagine the size question comes up with AR more than it does
with BCC, making "I" more suitable for the latter.

But given that this is for a bit of blurb on revision one of my landing page,
I shall stick with "I" and not spend any more time on it.

I noticed the subtle hint, it is something I have thought/worried about. I am
hoping to disrupt an existing market by providing a service that gamers are
already paying for in a new way, rather than convincing them to purchase an
entirely new service. So I will be aiming for the
B2SmallProportionOfGamersWhoActuallyPayForStuff rather than
B2PoorGamersWhoDoNotPayForAnything, which is admittedly a much smaller market
:-)

------
6ren
We do. But seriously, think of yourself as representing the company. Use 'I'
for yourself as a person, and 'we' for the company: the company isn't actually
you.

Recent Business of Software discussion on this very topic:
[http://discuss.joelonsoftware.com/default.asp?biz.5.834579.1...](http://discuss.joelonsoftware.com/default.asp?biz.5.834579.17)

~~~
davidw
Speaking of... both you and patio11 mentioned that forum. It's not one I
currently follow.

Worth it?

~~~
patio11
BoS is a major reason why BCC succeeded. That said, the forum is smaller and
less vibrant than it used to be.

------
tuhin
If the app is a serious business you are looking forward to, safer to use We.
Soon enough you will be more than one employee in that case.

If this is a weekend project, use I till it turns out to be bigger than your
wildest dreams.

However, in all cases, in your About section, have people with their real
images shown so that users are not left in the dark.

Often I chose the support expected from a project based on how many people are
there, but it is a disaster if I know it is one man and they never tell that
in About page.

------
eftpotrm
I've never founded a company. But, for over a year, I was the sole IT resource
for what was in effect a startup. If I'd gone under a bus, they'd have been in
real trouble.

One thing I quickly learnt then and find myself instinctively doing now with
hundreds of colleagues is that any work I do is the work of the system which
has placed me to do it and so not directly and personally mine. Net result, no
matter the external context - talking with clients or friends - I always say
'We'. Never I.

The company is the entity which is producing the work. That it currently only
contains you is not relevant to many and not something you want to advertise
to a few. So don't; if they ask then be honest but until then, the company is
offering the service, it is a corporate entity and IMHO any personalised
references to its actions should be in the plural, not the singular.

------
delano
It's never a good idea to be disingenuous. If you plan to run the company on
your own, use I. If you can conceive of and are hopeful of building a team,
use we.

People that would be turned off by that are not the kind of customers you
would want at this stage.

~~~
mryan
Although I am planning on building a team if the site takes off, for the
moment it is just myself. I will go with "I" for now, and hopefully change it
in future.

------
jasondavies
I think it's best to 100% open so that you attract the right people at the
stage that you're at. You should read "You’re a little company, now act like
one": [http://blog.asmartbear.com/youre-a-little-company-now-act-
li...](http://blog.asmartbear.com/youre-a-little-company-now-act-like-
one.html)

Do you really want to attract the kind of people who expect a big support
team, when you don't have a big support team? Probably not, unless you want to
disappoint them!

------
feint
No of of course not. I'm a sole founder - I founded Pen.io and a bunch of
other stuff. I recently was at the Launch conference. The judges new I was a
sole founder and that didn't stop me winning an award and get a bunch of
attention from both press and investors. Of course, it might not matter with
my app, but even from the sound of yours, I doubt people will worry that much
about the people behind it.

If you worry about silly things like that, you won't get anywhere.

------
adario
No need to lie, just use the company name instead of the royal we. Further, if
you need to get more detailed and/ or personal, create a separate blog post on
your site as a "message from the founder." In the end no one really cares if
they like your site. Back when Pud ran f-ckedcompany.com, a very popular web
1.0 site, everyone assumed he ran it alone, it had no negative effect I could
discern. Don't sweat it!

------
mikiem
Use "we" for/as the entity that is the company. Use "I" when speaking as
yourself. I believe this has been common and accepted behavior for as long as
I have ever known. Even if the company is only you for now, your company will
eventually be more than just you. Ask your mom this question, forget what she
says, and now you are "we". I will reiterate a previous comment.... You have
already spent too much time on this... Launch the page now!

------
xiaoma
Integrity is more important than a small edge from pretending that you're more
than one person.

Use "I" or the company name.

------
yurylifshits
In research papers it is common to use 'we' even in the single-author cases.

~~~
papaf
Somebody told me the reason for this which I found interesting. Even if you
felt you did the research yourself, somebody funded the research, somebody
commented on it, somebody at the library ordered journals for you, you
attended talks in your institution that inspired you etc.

~~~
merijnv
Personally I use "we" in scientific writing mostly because its a convenient
neutral way of addressing your reader. Referring to the reader directly with
"you" can be jarring or to informal.

------
oceanician
I think the main thing to consider is how you are going to provide support. If
there's any interaction with customers at all, you will not be able to cope /
provide good service as a one man outfit as you go from (perhaps) 10 customers
to 1000. I think bigger companies recognise this. It doesn't mean you can't do
it though. You just have to be clear that they're not buying support. Either
via email, phone, or in person. It either works for them, or it doesn't. You
can do that as a one man company.

------
melvinram
Why do you need to be specific about how many founders you have? In your
story, focus on the problem and the customers. Having a professional website,
business cards, grasshopper phone lines, etc will help project the
professional image you think you need. However, if people were to ask, I'd be
honest. Be proud of what you've accomplished alone. You might loose a few
sales but you'll earn those in the future. Authenticity counts.

------
herval
I'm also sole founder - one thing I can say is that customers may really not
care if you're alone on it, as long as you provide a great pre-post sales
experience (which is harder when you're solo, anyway).

On the flipside, I'm finding that getting investors is WAY harder when you're
solo. They want teams, and not having one kinda sends the wrong signal about
yourself (even if you're solo BECAUSE YOU WANT TO...)

------
iuguy
It's entirely down to you, I wouldn't be afraid of being a singular smart
individual in your firm, lots of other people do it. Peldi was a single person
founder and he managed to bootstrap himself to $2 million, from Italy no less
- <http://balsamiq.com/company>

------
bdfh42
All good advice here so far. One additional item - when you get your business
cards printed - style yourself something like "Technical Director" (Vice
President it it in your part of the world?). It gives you the authority you
need with customers and suppliers while implying a whole management board
backing you up.

~~~
mryan
Interesting tactic/title - I like it. "Technical Director" sounds good,
without being as egotistical as "Supreme Ruler and CEO of all he surveys",
which had been my first choice.

------
mkr-hn
A lot of people in your target market like giving independent business people
a shot. Those people won't worry much about the number of employees as long as
the service is good, and they'll tell others about your service if it's good.

------
cheez
Depending on the market segment and mission critical status, no one cares. In
fact, people may actually like it. I make no effort to hide that it is just me
and my customers include EA, AT&T, other big companies.

------
chipocabra
a/b test it.

------
tomstuart
"We" is fine. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majestic_plural#Nosisms>

------
HyprMusic
If it's a back story, then there's nothing to suggest you haven't brought more
people on board since.

------
fleitz
A/B test it, which ever leads to more sales, use that.

------
ignifero
Use "we" and refer to your startup as a company because that's what it is (and
is going to hopefully grow to be). It also shows a certain humility, like when
people write a research paper and refer to themselves as "we". But there are
other reasons too: suppose some psycho troll takes aim at your startup for
some reason (it has happened in our facebook games) and decides to make your
life hell; you 'd rather they did not know you are their only enemy

------
shareme
Be unassuming do not lie, TELL YOUR STORY!

biases: One person founder

