Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

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

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.

I think money has a lot to do with it. Founders work only for equity until the company has traction. Employees expect to be paid.

Yeah, that occurred to me as I pressed Send.

But assuming you can afford employee #1 (making cost somewhat moot), why otherwise might you decide to go in either direction?

cofounders typically have a lot more equity, and hence are typically much more motivated to work 24x7 until things are up and running. employees are not motivated in the same way.

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

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.

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

Sorry, totally not what I meant, although I can see how it could be understood the way you did.

I just wanted to see further discussion of co-founder vs. employee (#1). I tried to ask it in an enthusiastic way.

This is why I'm single, I guess. :)

I've actually been seriously thinking about that. Not sure how long that would take, but I'm definitely open to the idea.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact