Proposition HN: I will build your MVP if you pay me $8000 + 50% equity

[z-factor]

Obviously this is a response to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5037694

If anyone from the investing side thinks that offer is a good deal, try the reverse of that:

You'll pay me $5000 to build the MVP of that idea you've been kicking around in your head for the last year. Once I'm done, I'm on to the next project. At this point, you'll take over and spend an additional $3000 to acquire enough users/customers for us to evaluate the project's likelihood of success. We split the resulting company 50-50, as equal co-founders.

I would not take the offer from the original submission, but I'm pretty serious about this one. The thing is, I have 15+ years of experience and given how efficient I am by now, I can make a good living just building people's MVP's, but 50% in every resulting company could make this so much better.

You can email your ideas to hn-offer@maluke.com

Edit: I will also consider offers with bigger initial payments but different equity splits.

[brudgers]

Maybe you and hmexx could work together on a YC app.

[jspaur]

So I pitch the idea to the original offer (5037694) and get buy in. Then give you the 5k. I give you 50% of my 50% and I get 25% of the resulting company for acting as the idea broker. Hmmm ;)

(just attempting to 'hack' this trend)

[z-factor → jspaur]

Well, my offer is to get 50%, not 25%. If you want to reduce my share you can increase the upfront payment, so I guess you can spend some money out of your pocket to get a portion of the company. This can get out of hand fast =)

[jspaur → z-factor]

I give you 50% of my company which only owns 50% of the parent? ;) (just incase it isn't obvious....i'm not actually planning on taking this up just joking around a little)

[z-factor → jspaur]

I got that. Imagine this chain of 50% companies growing to some length. That could lead to a subprime mortgage crisis in a teapot. =)

[jspaur → z-factor]

Can you imagine the poor accountant who has to figure out the taxes?

[brudgers → z-factor]

It leads to a turtle.

[dragonbonheur]

Bold idea. But normally it's the people with money who get to dictate the terms and decide what they should do with their money. :)

[z-factor → dragonbonheur]

Yes, of course. Still, given all the people who make the claim that the ideas do not matter, only execution does, how many will act on that belief?

[kenshiro_o → z-factor]

Maybe you should reduce your terms then. Say $4K for the MVP if you have to spend 1 month on it, $8K for 2 months. I believe you also stand a better chance of getting potential "investors" in if you reduce ownership to 15-25%.

This is a very interesting approach to getting rich. I think I'll try it a few years down the line, after getting more professional experience...

[z-factor → kenshiro_o]

Well, the consensus is that the value of an idea is almost certainly zero, so the only way to make it worthwhile is to get one runaway success in a big pool of attempts. Everyone knows the VC version of this approach. This is how it would look like for a programmer. I'm not dead-set on these specific upfront costs and equity split, this is just the reverse of the original offer.

[snaveint]

This proposition provides far less value than hmexx's.

I understand what you're saying about "execution" being more important than the idea - that is true, but execution also means follow through. Building an MVP and then ditching it to pursue "the next project" is not execution, that's just pure labor, which anyone can find for far cheaper on elance.

[z-factor → snaveint]

First of all the same problem exists with hmexx offer -- he can stop putting any work in and will still be the 50% equity cofounder.

Second, if the business is promising and I have a significant equity in it, of course I'll pour more work into it. I'm on the next project only while the other party does their part marketing until we evaluate in a couple months if it's working out.

And I also want to point out that my work is not something you can buy on elance at all, and most definitely not for cheap anywhere.

[snaveint → z-factor]

In hmexx's scenario, once the MVP is ready, the developer has received the full amount of cash which is likely the main incentive.

In your proposition, the main incentive is your coding ability.

The key difference is that in the first scenario, the cash is a measurable benefit. In your scenario, your coding ability is uncertain, it could be worth more or less than the cash you are requesting - it's hardly worth gambling 50% equity on ones self-proclaimed ability.

[z-factor → snaveint]

I think hmexx did not intend the money to be the major incentive. It seems to me that the major incentive there is seeing your idea finally implemented and having someone handle the part that you don't like or don't know how to do. However, as much as my ability is unknown from just this offer, I don't think it can be argued that it's any less than hmexx's marketing abilities -- he claims to be techie, not some hotshot marketeer.

[onlyup]

Doesn't this idea fail because the person with the idea could hire someone and give away no equity? How much would an MVP usually cost?

[z-factor → onlyup]

There's value in getting it done fast and right the first time and having quality talent invested in the success. The upfront money is more of a way to guarantee that the idea person is invested in the success as well.

You could be right as well and then it's a testament to disproportionate leverage money has in our world.

[scottbartell]

Just the sound of 50% equity makes me cringe.

[z-factor → scottbartell]

Does it make you cringe in both my and hmexx's offers?

[dylanhassinger]

Brilliant!