huh? I said male parts won't help. a non-technical person, male or female, running a tech company would be like me running a company that, say, relies on sales to enterprises.
you can't just "know business" - to run a company, you need to understand what that company does.
Successful tech companies often need to do much more than just technology to be successful. There's no reason such a company shouldn't have at least one non-technical founder. I agree that it would be a mistake if all the founders were non-technical, or if the non-technical person were running the technical side of the show. But nothing suggests that's true here.
Exactly! We've built our company based not just on tech, but market needs. I've seen startup friends build kick-ass stuff that goes nowhere because no one knows about it (the marketing and biz/dev functions) 2 years after launch. Then they're demoralized, die off, and go back to a day job and hacking nights and weekends.
Agree, absolutely. If I didn't know my business well enough to close our first partnership with the top 4 US health insurer (paying) to develop an app we designed that will generate two patents, I'd bow out. We've closed a 5k deal, another 10k deal on the books about to close, and taken only 10k in angel money. That's not only understanding the company, it's understanding where the company is headed, and then working with my tech cofounder to implement like crazy til we get there. Plus, 'tech' of any type is a means to an end. One founder working on the tech and one founder working on the rest of the stuff that forms the means to the 'end' isn't always a recipe for disaster.