
Ask HN: I am currently the only developer in a startup. What to expect? - adamfaliq
I am the lead developer for my startup with two other non-technical co-founders. What problems can I expect to arise ?
======
pleasecalllater
Chaos, no sleep, chaos, endless stream of changing requirements, you will be
blamed for everything.

Just remember: the real bonuses will go to the managers, not you, they will
get rid of you as soon as they will need to find someone to blame for their
decisions.

And of course the non-technical managers will know that "everything is easy,
you will do the new dropbox over the weekend, right" (however that's so easy
that they cannot do it themselves).

~~~
scoggs
> you will be blamed for everything

Yes. I'm going to venture to say that if you sense this at all or you can
already feel like you know that your co-workers / superiors aren't very tech
savvy and you suspect they hired you to be a one-stop-shop to fix everything
computer and technology related for them (that they don't know about
themselves) than you need to, in painful detail, outline their expectations of
you, your capabilities, what you can and can't do, what you think should be
done, and also give ideas and plans for how to tackle the toughest things they
expect as well as how you'll go about outsourcing things you don't know how to
do / don't want to do / can't do from 3rd parties who absolutely can deliver
those things.

Get ahead of the nightmare before it eats you alive.

EDIT: Since so many other people are echoing my sentiments I'll also add that
if you feel like your superiors think along the lines of, "Good developers are
a dime a dozen and you can be easily replaced.", than you need to start job
hunting. I've met a few people who did IT or sales in server space /
colocation, etc. and helped them on a few side projects / start-up ideas and
I'll never forget how much money they wound up losing after trying to low ball
me for work I did when they dropped that line on me, flat out, in the middle
of me working on their websites, network, general IT stuff, and other apps /
generic projects. They tried to renegotiate my payment amount and payment
schedule in the middle of the contract after already signing it. Big mistake.

It felt so good to hold all the cards and power when they tried to flex that
"I'm your boss and I can make or break your career / life right now."
attitude. They thought they could easily replace a developer / technical
person like changing shoes but they didn't realize that a lot of developers
won't put up with this shit from the get go. Lots of people won't even give it
a chance, they aren't willing to work with superiors who are learning how to
treat technical folks. Be careful out there and don't allow your superiors to
dictate your mood or happiness. It's not worth your time, effort, or the money
because if you find yourself in that situation you can almost bet your aren't
getting paid enough. You'll probably be doing the work of 2-3 or more
professionals for people bringing in the money you should be making while
doing next to no actual work that helps the company profit.

Another thing. If you do wind up leaving a company and you know they aren't
paying you enough you can nearly bet that after you go and they try to fill
your spot they'll attempt to fill it by paying someone LESS than they paid
you. I've heard nightmare stories from recruiters / headhunters I've worked
with who were tasked with trying to fill my shoes with companies who seriously
thought I was wrong when I told them they were asking too much of me / paying
me too little for the "bare minimum" they thought I was doing (multiple
people's jobs as I said). People are crazy out there.

~~~
dabockster
> you need to, in painful detail, outline their expectations of you, your
> capabilities, what you can and can't do, what you think should be done, and
> also give ideas and plans for how to tackle the toughest things they expect
> as well as how you'll go about outsourcing things you don't know how to do /
> don't want to do / can't do from 3rd parties who absolutely can deliver
> those things

Having been in OP's exact position, he/she will probably be, at the very
least, threatened with termination in a highly unprofessional manner if this
is asked. I'm talking under-the-breath threats to passive-aggressive actions
designed to make OP's life a living hell. Non-tech founders are the worst and
will do everything to make you feel in debt to them since they provided you
with a job (aka an "amazing opportunity to disrupt XYZ field").

~~~
scoggs
I definitely didn't approach it exactly how I wanted it to come off but I mean
I'm not saying to go say this stuff verbatim to them but you have to take a
stance where you are attempting to meet half way, work with them, and try to
make them understand how you can best do your job. Especially if, like I said,
the superiors are really not tech savvy folks.

Without some understanding in that realm it's going to be choppy seas.

------
dirtyaura
I would make it clear for other founders that their role in the pre-product
startup is to

1) continuously (daily) interview potential customers BEFORE the MVP is ready
(and document their findings) so that you as a team have clear understanding
what customers actually need

2) ensure enough financing that the product and team can be build

3) help you in recruiting more developers

 _Understanding customers_

I once did a startup in a similar setup (2 non-technical founders, me as a
single technical founder) and the biggest mistake was 2 non-technical founders
were waiting for MVP to be ready before they really started to approach
customers. I tried to push them to do more customer interviews, but they
looked it purely from sales perspective and thought we didn't yet have
anything to sell. We effectively build the wrong thing that nobody wanted and
they started to lose interest when they realized that the MVP doesn't sell on
it's own without significant iteration.

 _Hiring_

Also, although building MVP quickly is an important step so that you can start
to collect better customer feedback in a search for product-market fit,
remember that building a team is as critical. Even if you don't have money to
hire engineers at this point, you need to start to build hiring pipeline
early. It is very hard as a single developer to effectively take care of both
bug fixing, devops and new feature development when you start to get
customers.

~~~
adamfaliq
We already have the first version of the app ready and the founders have been
talking to customers, but not as much as I expected. Hiring engineers is a bit
difficult since we are not making any revenue yet. The only option is to give
equity, I suppose.

~~~
smileysteve
> Hiring engineers is a bit difficult since we are not making any revenue yet.
> The only option is to give equity, I suppose.

Give up equity to raise money to hire and scale.

Otherwise, raise money preselling the product to scale the company, but this
likely chains you to customers that you may find later would be better with
their own consultants.

And if this means you're not getting paid, 20% (or 50%) of 0 and $12k
opportunity cost is $144k/year investment

------
pjc50
Well, obviously you're going to be doing all the development, testing,
sysadmin and office IT work until you get more staff, at which point
interviewing will take a lot of your time. You need to be adequately good at
all of these.

Less obviously you'll be making the technical decisions, and then having to
work out where responsibility for these and "product" decisions lie.

It's not clear where the cash is coming from; are you all paying in? Did that
decide the split? Who's getting paid and who's putting in "sweat equity"?
You're also a founder, right?

Given your position you should entrench your status ASAP as "CTO" or similar
title _before_ you start hiring. You should decide how you feel about people
getting hired "above" you (good or bad) and plan accordingly.

There will be at least one stand-up shouting argument early on. This is
normal, but needs to be handled maturely - done successfully it will improve
the business. Being the "remote" partner puts you at a disadvantage here.

------
oldboyFX
Care to give us some context?

Also, take the doomsayers in this thread with a grain of salt. Some developers
have bad experiences in their career and start thinking that all non-technical
folks are just soul-sucking vampires, while often in reality they themselves
are the source of the problems.

I would say that your main function is to effectively communicate with the co-
founders and be the bridge between technology and business goals. Make sure
they're aware of pros and cons of every development related decision. Get used
to saying no and pushing back on some of their ideas. Your main goal is
building a successful business, writing clean code and using cool tech comes
in secondary.

------
expertentipp
Everything will be your responsibility and your task. Everything will be
"easy" according to non-technical people who will expect "trivial features" as
seen on Gmail/Dropbox/Twitter/Linkedin.

------
DyslexicAtheist
it would be an alarm bell (big one) if none of the founders has a technical
background. When you join a new group of people who you have no history with
it, then it takes some time to build trust (battles fought together under
which bonding can occur) and learn their motives.

My fav resource (only discovered it recently here on HN) is this document
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZJZbv4J6FZ8Dnb0JuMhJxTnw...](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZJZbv4J6FZ8Dnb0JuMhJxTnwl-
dwqx5xl0s65DE3wO8/preview#)

it has helped me a great deal to assess a new situation and figure out whether
the non-tech founders and decision makers in the firm are actually on the ball
doing _their_ part.

Understanding their role (what is their strategy in finding product market
fit) is crucial in evaluating _" your bosses"_ performance and ultimately if
whether the team and product can make it post MVP.

Just focusing on MVP is a fallacy IMVHO because it lets them isolate you (the
engineer) into sticking to your niche within the org. The problems then start
once you have the MVP and _bosses_ then realizes they have missed all the
steps (because they didn't know and unlike you are still learning the hard way
how to do things) and you as a team are actually nowhere. It always ends in
tears unless all of you are already at eye-level.

good luck!

~~~
dabockster
> It always ends in tears

Tears is best case scenario. OP should be reviewing his/her paperwork with an
attorney at this point. I fully expect the employment documents to have errors
or vagueness conveniently located in places that would benefit the business.

------
kelvin0
I've been in the same situation and here's what I learned: You will mostly
never be able to revisit and refactor code 'once and for all' when it's
deployed into production. The choices you make now will affect you in the
future.

Instead your focus should be to take some time regularly and make some changes
to keep your code from becoming a chaotic vengeful mess of a spaghetti bomb.
The best analogy I have is something akin to gardening: it's through constant
care and weeding out of bad vegetation that you have a great garden. You can't
leave your code unattended and must always tend to it...

~~~
megous
Not necesarrily true. I managed to do the most refactorings while under a non-
technical leadership. You just take complete ownership for the code in that
situation and do it along the way. You say no to features that would mess up
the code or make the UI inconsistent, and you offer cleaner alternatives
instead.

As a single tech person you also have a lot of power.

~~~
kelvin0
We are saying the same thing. Take ownership, plan and grow your code base
intelligently with refactor and tests included in every estimate.

------
NeedMoreTea
You are the doing all the work department, whilst they are head office.

It might not _be_ like that, but it will sure as hell feel like it. When they
both take an early Friday to have a meeting in the bar/home/park, and you're
stuck burning hours, and the weekend, trying to make those quick changes
needed before next release. They both agreed they were necessary, but they
don't accept that needs a full db redesign.

You have everything in writing, and your respective percentage and share
vesting sorted already? No? Leave now.

If you have 50% and they 25% each, signed off, and you thrive on stress, keep
on truckin'

------
traviswingo
Be prepared to not get any credit where credit is due and to be blamed for
everything.

This is a position I was in for my own company and I will never put myself in
a position like that again.

I spent countless nights and 20 hour days writing code, rewriting code,
deleting everything, starting over, integrating every fucking thing on the
planet, removing those integrations, etc.

The non technical founders won’t have any sense of what it takes to do the
random bs things they come up with while “at a lunch,” and will expect you to
whip it up quick, oh and it’ll have to take precedence over that thing they
asked you to whip up quick just yesterday.

When you finally decide you’ve had enough and things aren’t going anywhere and
you leave for a super high paying job, they’ll turn around with claims that
you never did anything and you really fucked them.

I know this might come off as harsh, but being the only technical person is a
huge mistake. Try to get at least one more in there and REALLY push to set
expectations. Be very transparent in exactly what it’ll take to do something.
If you need to create a feature, let them know “sure I can do it. It’s not
easy though. There are database migrations to write, the feature will need to
be tied into our existing codebase. It’s currently X, but needs to be Y for
this to work with it. Problems A, B, and C will probably arise and I’ll have
to 1, 2, 3, ...200.”

Even then they’ll just be daydreaming about their next “important meeting”
where they’re really just getting drunk at another lunch with someone and
discussed the product in a few hushed tones before “shooting the shit.”

You are the backbone and the heart of this company. Don’t be afraid to speak
up, and understand if you leave, they’re fucked. Don’t let them make you
believe otherwise.

------
xevb3k
While the OP has said they have 20% equity. Given the other two founders have
a controlling interest, to what extent could they push the OP out and
take/reduce their equity?

I’m not saying they would, but I’m wondering how possible it is. Could they
vote to redistribute equity, or massively dilute OPs equity and then
distribute more equity to themselves for example?

~~~
jaxn
Very possible. It depends on the operating agreement, but unless any
investment or creation of shares requires unanimous consent, they can be
diluted to virtually nothing.

~~~
xevb3k
Interesting, it’s always been my assumption, and unless everyone is operating
in good faith, if don’t have board control (and/or >50% of equity) it’s a
possibility that I might well get diluted to nothing.

As such, unless I’m confident that I trust everyone involved, I would value
equity quite low (and I’ve certainly been screwed out of equity in the
past...)

------
TomK32
I've done this eight years ago, delivered a prototype in Ruby on Rails with
MongoDB for two educators from the mid-west. Six timezones between us and
though I kept developing for them, most of the time as the sole developer, I
never met them in real life. Expect the company to run out of money every now
and then, be prepared and you'll be just fine. That's startup-life :)

Would I do this again? YES. I enjoyed having the freedom to make technical
decisions from the database to the amount of tests I wrote (the app still has
some 80% of its code covered, the rest is just the admin area I never cared
writing tests for). We also got the product out early to customers. Make sure
the decisions and implementations you do are there for the next five years.
Don't attempt something stupidly new but stick to solid tech with a good
ecosystem that you can rely on without having to keep track of it all the
time. Mind you, I mentally wrote off the little equity I had (the hourly rate
was great) since it just didn't grow exponentially, I rather see the company
around another eight years without me.

What I'd do differently is to set myself a target, say three years. If by then
the company didn't grow as we wanted it, I'd go and try with another startup.

------
mkobar
I have been through this (as the only tech founder in the group) three times
with three different startups and found different reasons that it did not work
out.

1\. Equity. I like to think that the percentage of equity you get in relation
to the amount of work you will be asked to do. 20% to do all the product
(and/or service) development seems way too low for me.

2\. In one of the startups I founded, we could not convince the non-tech CEO
founder to release the MVP to early customers - even after extensive customer
interviews, because the non-tech was not comfortable that it was an MVP. No
desire to find the golden product/market fit and no desire to release anything
less than a full blown, polished product (which we could immediately start
charging for). And no funds for development either (just equity) - so entirely
too much development needed to be done before any return (and no customer
feedback).

3\. And then I was in a startup that had a non-tech founder who was very weak
at sales and very bad at raising money. But really good at asking for AI, VR,
voice recognition, and (add buzz word here) in an MVP - entirely created and
supported by a sole developer.

I would suggest staying away from any of the above.

Good Luck.

------
stinos
To counter lots of (possibly unfounded because too general and/or lack of
actual experience) negativity here: the problems will mainly depend on the co-
founders. Non-technical doesn't per se mean completely ignorant or stupid. If
they are reasonable and smart, they recognize you are the one who knows the
tech stuff and hence will let you take care of the technical side without much
questions, let you experiment and go your own way, will value your input when
it comes to decision-making on the software front, won't set insane deadlines,
...

Such people exist, I've worked with them, and that was all good. In the
beginning it did sometimes take lengthy discussion why some features couldn't
'just' be implemnted but for the rest the main problem I had was getting into
a 'me alone on an island and I'm the king' state leading to less self-critique
and being stuck with old tools while better stuff is available. But nothing
that cannot be fixed by keeping an open mind and reading around on the
internet on the tech used.

Obviously if your co-founders don't quite fall in this category, yeah, running
might still be the better option.

~~~
dudul
Such people do indeed exist, but a strong signal that you're actually dealing
with reasonable, non technical co founders is when they give good equity to
the "technical" founder.

Based on other comments, it looks like OP got 20% (even unclear if it's
documented), while the other 2 share the remaining 80%. This is a strong clue
that these guys have no respect for the technical guy/gal. They will see
him/her as a code monkey that can be replaced asap by a bunch of guys in India
or in Eastern Europe.

~~~
stinos
_looks like OP got 20% (even unclear if it 's documented), while the other 2
share the remaining 80%_

Ah, didn't get that. That indeed is not the best sign..

~~~
Scriptor
In addition to that, OP said they got less equity because they were "remote".

------
no1youknowz
Get out, get out now.

> for my startup

It's not YOUR startup. Your startup would mean 100% of ownership.

(from another answer)

> 20% for me for now because I work remotely.

Do you have any documentation for this 20% stake ownership? If not, you can be
replaced in an instant.

Are these two founders in the same country? Yes, well expect to have decisions
made without your input.

There is also the challenge of the other founders appreciating your input into
the company. You are doing everything. They won't appreciate this and they
won't see the amount of work either.

Non-technical founders know squat and they don't care either about how much
time it takes to do things.

\------

I've gone through this myself. I was a "founder" in 1 startup with a non-
technical founder and before that I was a "small" equity holder in another
company, which was founded by 3 non-technicals.

In both circumstances I was just an employee doing my job. No upside at all. I
didn't come away with anything but experience in the respective industry.

\------

If you are going to stay, then I suggest to learn how to implement the tech
for this startup and in turn, can provide you with a springboard for your own
startup and if this is the case. Ensure you are getting paid!

~~~
dabockster
> Ensure you are getting paid!

Jumping from this, even if OP is getting paid he/she should make sure they're
not doing anything sketchy with their pay/tax documents. I've had to go to the
IRS (US tax agency) because a former employer filed me on their business taxes
as a contractor when I worked in the office as an employee. Some of my
colleagues who also worked at startups in the past told me about pay
discrepancies when times got tough for the business.

------
ropman76
The thing that I enjoyed being the solo developer most is that I got to make
all of the software design choices. I set up the project the way I wanted to
and code in way I felt would best to ship the product. Loved that aspect of
it.

That being said I would do two things differently. 1\. Be hyper about testing.
If you are the only dev working on a project test,test and test more. Write
good unit tests. Have your fellow co-founders test and sign off on a feature
before going to prod. If you are working hard it's easy to miss the obvious.
Test it all.

2\. Find good ways to communicate where you are and what you are doing. Some
features take longer than others. It drives non-technical people crazy (Why
did this feature take an hour and this one a week?) but that is the hard fact
of software dev. Use a Jira board or an email, whatever will let your co-
founders know what features are where. It really saves on the annoying status
update requests in person or over email that disrupt your day. Good Luck :)

------
eaguyhn
Be careful about being "typecast". You may find yourself doing work that is
necessary but not something you'd want to focus on career-wise. However,
everyone else may start thinking of you as the specialist for that work.

Example from my career - I joined a startup as a senior-level architect. There
were only a few tech folks at the time and my background was databases, so I
ended up doing a lot of the database work. It was something I was good at, but
I considered it part of a past from which I was moving on.

Eventually I was typecast as an operational DBA - a tactical role rather than
the strategic one I envisioned. When management decided to adjust my salary
accordingly, I had to leave.

Lesson: Communicate to management all the technical roles that are required in
your startup. Let them know which ones align with your own career path. Remind
them that they eventually need to get others to fill the other roles. You will
have to repeat this often, just not often enough to be a pain about it.

------
_Marak_
Unless the other two co-founders have raised a massive amount of capital for
you to hire an engineering team you should probably leave immediately.

Everyone else commenting has brought up valid points. This is a high-risk
high-stress low-reward situation for you.

Get out while you can. The first version of the app _you_ built can serve as a
great showcase in your portfolio.

------
gwbas1c
You didn't say much. What kind of product? What kind of experience do you and
your founders have? What are your and their personalities like?

The problem with startup advice is that a lot of it just doesn't apply. People
make assumptions and generalizations that apply to one business space or team
dynamic, and then project it onto your space and team dynamic.

Because of this, it's very hard to anticipate problems.

In my experience, I was 50-50 with someone non-technical. My biggest mistake
was not walking away soon enough. The warning sign was that my co-founder let
his imagination run away whenever we tried to plan anything. We could have
fixed all the other "mistakes" we made otherwise. The problem was that most of
our planning turned into me trying to guide my co-founder back to reality.
(Edit: It took me over a year to realize that my co-founder was constantly
letting his imagination run away. In hindsight, if I realized this sooner, I
would have set up the arrangement very differently.)

IMO, it's all about everyone's attitude and product / service choice. As long
as you're in a space that you're capable of working in, and everyone has the
right attitude, you can learn the rest. (My co-founder, after we separated,
had a lot more success once he stopped letting his imagination run away.)

What I can say is this: Are the people you're working with reasonable people?
Reasonable doesn't mean mature, as unreasonable people are good at appearing
mature. Reasonable means that, if they have an idea, they don't keep pushing
when you say no.

Because "they" outnumber you, another thing to look for is if one team member
is a mediator. They might try to mediate in situations when they should take a
side. (IE, trying to mediate when someone wants to make a green line with a
blue marker.) That's what I mean by confusing maturity with being reasonable.

------
innodb1
I have been working in a startup for close to 2 yrs ,with myself being the
only developer , although I have a small team trained to perform daily
activities I convinced another person to be the CEO and do the marketing,
although we make only enough money to just sustain it has been a rich &
different experience for a developer In programming we get as many iterations
to get our code ready, but many time we get only one chance to convince
people. I will probably never be good at people management or marketing Point
is forget the money or the agreements are you convinced you are learing
something new then continue ?? if your company becomes big or not people will
recognize whatever you did

------
dudul
You don't give a lot of context, and a lot of comments here are telling you to
run away.

My only advice: if you don't get at least 40% of equity, run away. Two "idea
guys" giving barely 20% to the technical code monkey and enjoying controlling
share while they can deal with "the real stuff" is a huge red flag. If they
are willing to treat you as a real equal (and even more, as the guy who will
actually do most of the work for at least a few months) then it's worth giving
it a shot if you believe in the idea.

------
vijaybritto
The most annoying part of your work will definitely be "interviewing" and
Knowledge transfer sessions for the foreseeable future. Thinking about this
even gives me a headache. The pros can be god mode for a long time. If you are
good in your job then management will think twice to fire you. Then you'll
probably be more entrepreneurial once you leave that place. Your value will be
high. (Warning: These thoughts may not necessarily reflect reality.)

------
dabockster
Well, the first question I'd ask you is ARE YOU BEING PAID IN ACTUAL LIQUID
CASH? If no, jump ship now.

Other things include contractor or W2, the nature of your work environment,
who's tools you're using to do the work, who decides salary and the method of
payment, company culture, etc. In startups like this, you have a much higher
risk of being scammed somehow (late paychecks, being given a 1099 when you are
legally entitled to a W2, having your pay docked if your boss isn't satisfied
with your work, etc) when the business starts losing any amount of money.

Bottom line is that you should treat this as a 3-6 month W2 gig and jump ship
during that time.

Also, this has been said all over HN but it needs repeating, equity is
essentially Monopoly money. Forget the equity and focus on finding a new job.
Remember that these people shoving all this work on you are also the ones who
control your ability to get paid (and, by proxy, house and feed yourself), and
have the ability to "forget" to file your paycheck when times get tough.

------
fijter
I've been the sole developer of several startups over the years and still am
for some. Some suggestions:

\- If there's no unequal investment in the startup (like for example someone
putting in a lot of money or more time compared to others) ownership should be
split equally amongst the founders. Working remotely is a nonsense argument
for getting less equity, not giving everyone the same will most likely end up
in conflicts later on.

\- Make sure you have your equity on paper and come up with a vesting scheme
so no co-founder can walk out with 33% after a couple of months while the
others have to carry on for years. (for example unlock 4% every month of work
so that you only earned the complete amount after putting in at least 2 years)

\- Becoming profitable and/or receiving investments can take a while, does
every team member have the runway to work on this long enough to not need any
income from it?

\- You can't just leave like with a regular job since the future of the
startup depends on what you do, keep this in mind. If you are not 100% sure
you want to spend the next couple of years on this tell the co-founders
beforehand that you will build the MVP and decide once that's done if you want
to continue or not. A vesting scheme will make sure you at least get something
out of it.

\- If you complete the MVP and don't want to continue you can consider selling
the MVP to your co-founders at a predefined rate in exchange for your shares.
If you do this for a good price and terms and they have the funds for it this
might be best for all parties since you are no longer connected to each others
as shareholders, they don't have to involve you in new decisions and you don't
have to free up time in the future for a company you are no longer involved in
otherwise.

\- You might want to wait with formalizing the shareholder deeds until a
investment comes into play (this all depends on where to company is located
and what the laws are of course). Do get stuff signed on paper beforehand
though!

\- Don't undervalue yourself, in the end YOU are building it, idea's alone are
worth nothing.

\- Startups are rough, prepare for a lot of fights, failure and lost free time
and decide for yourself if you think this startup is worth spending a couple
of years of your life on. Keep in mind that most startups fail, my personal
experience is that this usually has to do with the dedication of the team
doing it.

Good luck!

------
thiago_fm
I have wrote code for 3 failed startups and today lead a nice life working for
a big company.

My thought:

Get out.

------
ttflee
You need an interlocutor to talk to about your technical choices. You would
also talk a lot about the product and strategy and reassure that the
communications are effective and mutual knowledge updated.

------
gus_massa
How is the equity split? (33%-33%-33%) or (49%-49%-2%)? Do you have it in
written?

~~~
adamfaliq
It is 20%-40%-40%. 20% for me for now because I work remotely.

~~~
albertgoeswoof
That’s odd, remotely from the other 2? If there’s only 3 of you aren’t they
also remote?

This rings alarm bells to me.

~~~
bausshf
I second this. It sounds like you're getting ripped off, especially if you're
the only developer. You'll basically be the one to deliver the product or
initiate it.

------
sambull
RIP brother especially if any of those guys have ideas.

------
tomp
Ask to become the CTO/technical co-founder, with appropriate responsibility,
decision power and equity (vested if necessary).

------
corobo
You will learn to hate the word "just"

Can we just.. Could you just.. Surely it's just..

------
gbraad
You will be promised a lot, you will sacrifice a lot, but you will gain
nothing.

------
raztogt21
Ask for the 80% of the stake.

------
nolite
Expect to be looking for another job in a year

~~~
dabockster
I give it another 3-6 months before OP has to seek treatment for mental
illness.

Source: I got diagnosed with major depression after leaving a job almost
exactly like OP's. Doing better now, though.

------
HiroshiSan
Why are there two non technical founders?

~~~
dabockster
They're probably "idea people". As in, they had enough money in a low cost of
living area to grab a business license and open up shop. Then they hired OP as
the remote "computer person" to write their "idea" for them as a program.

It happens frighteningly often especially outside of tech hubs. A lot of small
to medium businesses still treat tech workers like Revenge of the Nerds
outside of the city limits of SV, Seattle, New York, etc.

------
gekkonier
Run forest, run!

