Hacker News Reader

Comment by trjordan | Hacker News Reader

Two founders are better than one when one of the key problems you will face is hiring. One founder hasn't proven they can recruit. Two founders have proved they can convince at least one other idiot to join them.

This is important for VC businesses, where hiring quickly is the only way to grow. But it's not important for smaller businesses, where cash management matters more.

View on HN

Is being able to recruit the most important trait? I think it is overall selling that matters. Why can selling potential not be demonstrated by other means? Playing with human relationships can come later.

I'd argue that "recruiting" is a form of selling. Especially in the beginning, when you're selling the dream...

In the initial phase, we can only sell to people who trust us. Becoming a co-founder is a big commitment and a challenge to long-term relationships. Why can't it be something like, get five customers you know using your product/service. I have been through a bad co-founder divorce and I think it is bad advice that co-founder will increase your success chances. I think the mostly one co-founder gets a free(er) ride. Werner Vogels in his startup school lecture says "Have you seen a group with one head monkey and a leiutenant monkey?"

If you sell well, the VCs want you to scale so yes, lots of time spent recruiting.

If you have a smaller business making enough money and don't want to scale and therefore don't need VC money - then selling is definitely the number one requirement.

>Two founders have proved they can convince at least one other idiot to join them.

It stops being relevant once you find your 1st customer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com