Ask HN: Why is it so hard to find a technical cofounder? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Why is it so hard to find a technical cofounder?

32 pointsfsndz49 comments

why is it so hard to find a technical cofounder, someone who can actually code ? I have tried YC cofounder matching and it is awful. People ghost you for no reason. People pretend to be technical but once you discuss with them you realise they can't code and just want someone to build their projects for them. I am Looking for someone to work with on interesting projects around open source LLMs, AI in EdTech or AI in Finance. Tech stack: ruby, rails, python, fastapi, javascript/React, PostgreSQL, heroku. Here are some projects I did alone: http://discute.co https://www.rimbaud.ai

If you are in the same situation or would like to have a fellow coder to work with, drop me an email: ndzomgafs@gmail.com

View on HN

As someone who has made a modest business around helping people find technical cofounders, let me share some things that tend to make it EASY to find one.

1. You're an expert in the domain.

2. You've done significant work to prove out the idea already. This can be a variety of things. You've already made mock ups or a prototype. You've interviewed a bunch of potential customers and organized your thoughts. Best possible thing is you've already acquired customers ready to pay.

3. You have a clear, grounded vision of what the product needs to be now and a grand, compelling vision of what the product could be in the future.

4. You can articulate what type of project this is clearly (venture backed biz? lifestyle biz? funky idea that has no intention of making money?) and what sort of working relationship or culture you'd like as it grows.

As someone who has founded before and spent time on YC cofounder matching, most people have vague ideas in domains they don't understand with no prospective customers and put no effort into validating the idea. So they try to offload the cost of validating the idea onto some engineer by building it (building, btw, being the most inefficient method of validating).

I was going to write these points but in reverse. I’m an outgoing engineer in Seattle and I find myself to be a bit of a lightning rod for “just hear my app idea out” types. Invariably every bar-top pitch I hear breaks down on just the points you mention.

- there is no clear vision of how the app addresses a real world, widely experienced problem.

- “how are we going to make money” should be a really easy-to-answer question for a founder, but not in my experience.

- there is a weird obsession with a tech stack that they obviously know nothing about. More vaguely, requirements they describe are at the wrong level of abstraction for an “ideas person”

- they are way more likely to vomit more and more “potential” user experiences than to have a solid understanding of the core experience, like a PM from the pits of hell itself.

- As an engineer I can smell a salesman from a mile away. My brain works in logical steps and bottom-up, so grand-design sales pitches fall flat on their face. The people who pitch apps tend to be salesmen to the bone. Don’t sell it to me, motivate me to work with you—you want me to make it, not to use it.

I’m not against the idea of helping someone make an app, but I’ve never found someone with a compelling idea. My normal constructive critcism is that they should get their pitch clear enough that they could convince a bank to give them a loan. These types of people somehow think they can wrangle an engineer, but most aren’t delusional enough to think they can cheat the bank.

What worries me about these types of folks too is that they usually find an under-experienced engineer who has just enough chops to build out some MVP but not follow things through to completion. They then invariably string this person along through build out and then find a way to cut them out and bring on a real technical cofounder.

Another key one I would add is an appreciation of what a technical co-founder brings. They're not just there to manage devs to realize your brilliant idea. Success is "99% perspiration" and that goes all-around--aka ideas are a dime-a-dozen.

> ... most people have vague ideas in domains they don't understand with no prospective customers and put no effort into validating the idea.

Brilliant summary!

BTW what would you consider to be the best method of validating ideas?

It depends on the product. Most of my experience is in B2B, for that I recommend building a clickable prototype in Figma or another tool. If you can get 3 customers to sign contracts based on that, the idea has potential.

Why are you choosing tech stack if you don't have a technical co-founder? That stack looks like a mess (assuming it is AND not OR). Ruby, Rails, FastAPI, Python, React?

There's way too much going on there. If you are targeting AI you might as well just use Python (with a front end framework if you really need it). What is the rest for? If you have the ability, consider Render over Heroku. It's similar, might have a brighter future, and is likely less expensive.

Also consider your dream technical cofounder has to be a master of a lot based on that list. It will be hard to find someone willing to oversee that. First thing I'd be trying to do is cut it in half before even considering it.

As some who might be interested in being a technical co-founder in the future, I'll tell you what I'd want. 100% of tech stack control, and confidence you are the right person for the other job with a vision I believe in that I trust.

It might be your pitch, or it might just be hard. I'm not sure I or anyone else has enough context to give you a definitive answer.

I do want to conclude by saying that I think you asking at all is a positive learning experience. The above is just an initial opinion based on some assumptions - good luck.

At least some times..

Because they hired some low cost contractors in a 2nd or 3rd world country to build a shitty version of the app in Django with Bootstrap. Now you get to inherit that at your starting place - oftentimes this is largely technical baggage.

It is OR not AND. I just listed the different technologies I am comfortable working with. But sure for an AI product, doing an MVP with React + fastapi + postgreSQL and deploying on heroku or render seems like a good idea.

What are your technical reasons for choosing Postgres over MySQL?

mostly convenience + Postgres is better if you have frequent and concurrent write ops

I’m gonna be brutally honest here. I’m a very senior software engineer with lots of experience across tech stacks. I tried the YC cofounder matching system but after three bad experiences I won’t be using it again. There were too many instances of people without technical chops trying to take advantage of my skillset. Multiple cases of working on projects for the ideas we had come up with together only to be ghosted. In the final instance - what started out as a supposedly equitable split of work and equity became a written offer of 2% with dilutable shares after I had spent weeks building out the product. I immediately quit the project and the other cofounder had the balls to try to negotiate but by the point I was so insulted I quit and deleted all traces of the code.

Sickening. I won’t be working with anyone from there again. Too few people I cannot trust and frankly too many product-types that have no idea what software building entails.

Really sorry you had such a bad experience. It's exactly what I am trying to avoid. Let's chat if possible.

I had a look at your first discute site. The rimbaud site errored out.

If I had the skills in your chosen tech stack (which I don't) my first question would be "show me your business plan".

As a rational person, I would be looking at "my" probable return on "my" investment in time and effort into "your" idea. In other words, an evaluation of opportunity cost. Most competent technical potential cofounders are either earning a good income or working on some idea that will produce a considerable multiple on their recent income.

In either case, your proposal would need to be more attractive than the alternatives available to them.

I've cofounded a number of startups. I have found that a major rule is that you should NEVER let a non technical person lead a technical startup. They simply don't get it. It is way easier for the tech person to be the CEO/CTO and partner with a CMO/CFO who will get their hands dirty. There is a good reason that accountancy/legal,consulting firms are run by accountant thinkers and the big tech companies run by tech thinkers. I understand that the skill most represented in the fortune 500 CEO is technical.

So if you are looking for a tech cofounder you should look for them to be CEO.

The usual answer to the question is that people who are competent to play CTO meet a lot of people who want to be CEO and are not competent to do so. Various spins on "I've got an idea, please can you implement it for negligible equity".

Your post is ambiguous though. "Fellow coder" in particular. Are you looking for a second technical person as a co-founder, when you yourself want to build the product? That seems to have different failure modes to the "build me a better facebook" crowd.

I am looking for a fellow technical cofounder. I realized coding products alone is fun but has a lot of limitations. You have to sacrifice some stuff because you are alone. But if you have a technical cofounder then the two of you can go further faster. And things are more fun when you are not alone.

Interesting. There's usually a really sharp drop in output when you go from one developer to two. Instead of working at the speed of internal thought you're now working at the speed of communication between the two of you. Plus you'll disagree about a bunch of things because engineering is an incomplete information game. Could you expand on some of the limitations you've run into programming by yourself?

The CEO+CTO stereotype makes more sense to me than two technical people. Better chance of complementary skills. So I'm curious what I'm missing here. Thanks!

If you work alone on a very complex project, the task can be so huge it discourages you. You will have to spend too much time on it before getting the slightest results. Coding is hard, bugs can be depressing, and when you are alone, you struggle alone. It can be daunting. The more complex the project is, the more daunting it is when things don't work. On the other hand, when you have another technical cofounder, first of all you can share the work and accomplish more. Second, having someone to bounce ideas with, and having to coordinate, actually helps you clarify your ideas and thus makes those ideas more robust. When you code alone, sometimes you get into a rabbit hole and you loose sight of what is important, you neglect some key details etc. A technical cofounder acts as an accountability partner, pushing you to always do your best because you know your work affects another person, motivating you when you are down and you motivate them when they are down. Having a non-technical cofounder can be nice too, but it really depends on the idea. If the idea needs more business sense than technical prouesse, then technical + non-technical is good. But if the idea implies a high level of technical prouesse, then you definitely need a technical cofounder, else you just won't make it. For example, nobody will try to train a 70B LLM alone, you need a team (and a lot of GPUs).

This is not about cofounder.

It’s a general problem.

It’s always hard to find a decent X, no matter what X is.

Match making just a square of the original problem, because you both have to be good in the eyes of each other.

I do think cofounders, particularly cofounders with specific skillsets who could be earning a solid salary at a more established company, have additional barriers. Being a cofounder means giving up "I'll definitely make X" for "Maybe some day we can sell for 1000X", so you need to find someone who's willing to take on the risk and fully believes in your plan.

It is still within the general problem.

Same way being a decent doctor means you have more opportunities to live in a wealthier places, to work in a better hospitals, so you need to find someone who is willing to take some pay cuts and fully believes in a mission of making healthcare available to everyone.

If you for example are looking for a good doctor living in some god forgotten place.

It is not - your offer isn't good enough to convince someone to invest in it. Usually, communication skills are very important to find a good co-founder - which seems that you lack. So I will focus on communicating better what you have to offer and what you are looking for. And hope for the former to be really enticing. By the quality of the links you shared, your proposal seems to be quite uninteresting, why would I partner with you in place of just doing it all myself?

Thanks for the feedback. Which part wasn't clear ? I am a technical cofounder, I can code in ..., I have worked on some AI products (links...) I want to work with a cofounder now to make better products around open source LLMs, AI in Edtech, AI in Finance.

"why would I partner with you in place of just doing it all myself?" I don't know maybe because "if you want to go fast, go alone; if you want to go far, go together?"

> Thanks for the feedback. Which part wasn't clear ?

What you offer isn't clear (or good enough?). Sorry to be blunt but your work seems to be junior level so I wouldn't expect you to have a lot of experience. Which is ok! But that's not enticing to potential cofounders.

In a deal, most people want to get the most benefit from it while contributing what they can. So what you offer is just work, you are looking someone to partner with you to work on generic areas.

Now if one of your projects have some $5k MRR and you were willing to give part of it to bring a cofounder, then you would have plenty of people interested.

> I don't know maybe because "if you want to go fast, go alone; if you want to go far, go together?"

I can't go faster carrying someone. I guess most can't too.

if everyone followed your reasoning, there wouldn't be Facebook and a lot of other tech startups.

I'm presuming you're "technical" yourself. I would give a very different answer if you weren't.

I think the problem is looking for a "technical cofounder" without letting them be a "technical professional acquaintance," first. You've got to ease into the relationship. Maybe participate in a few hackathons, do some pair-programming, engage in an unrelated hobby that's also rife with nerds, such as bouldering or parenting. If you have a reliable technical friendship, they may become available when you happen upon a real domain expert. "Technical cofounder" is all-too-often a thankless task, so trust arrives on foot.

yes I am technical. The issue is that my friends for engineering school are not into coding (most are mechanical or industrial engineers). My friends from business school are not into coding either. There isn't a lot of hackathons here in Paris like in SF, most of the time it is just in engineering schools for students. I am working full time. I reached out to ruby/python groups but they are also very inactive. the software engineering culture in France is not really like in the US where things go fast and there is a lot of talent and excitement. But I will maybe try harder/better. It's still very frustrating.

I know at least one French founder, but I'll admit he was very excited to be working in SF when I met him. You may have to leave the country, simply because SF is the Schelling Point where we've all agreed to meet. But Paris is a city of two million souls. I struggle to imagine that not one of them is the right partner for you.

What do you mean by "reached out?" Did you attend? Insinuate yourself into the community? Perhaps you are hunting with neither enough commitment nor subtlety.

I'd fit the bill, I've talked to a few people about working together and realized I'd be building the product and it was unclear what they would be contributing.

I feel you !

I think most people good at tech just want to focus on the tech and not the whole business thing that being a founder implies.

I certainly wouldn't. Nor would I care to risk my money investing, I just want a salary and work on the nuts and bolts. I hate wearing a suit and meeting with businessmen. I have a feeling this may be why.

I think it's pretty rare to find people with skills and affinity to do both. Because the jobs require pretty radically different personalities.

This is true. I have heard this verbatim from multiple coder buddies. It's a certain kind of personality that's excited to take on these risks, let alone these tasks. Technical cofounder is an obscure type of person.

because technical founders have ideas enough of their own and your idea would have to be crazy good for them to consider it.

I’d guess because startups are hard, rarely lucrative, and only make sense if you’re deeply invested in the idea. I’d guess for most technologists they’d prefer to sink their blood sweat and tears in their own ideas.

Most people who are deeply technical and want to work at a startup either already have ideas they're working on, or want to be founding engineer at after a company raises because of a (perceived) lower risk

I am having the opposite issue. As a technical cofounder that codes[1], I'm interested in a cofounder that is a Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA), a pediatric neurologist (MD) or child psychologist (Ph.D / Psy.D) so we can develop a solution together in a somewhat niche domain.

I'm also on YC cofounder but they do not provide the ability to search profiles by education / degree. Any suggestions on finding cofounders with such a specific background is appreciated.

[1] https://github.com/hbcondo

Do you really need a co-founder if you feel very strongly about your idea and the business you're trying to build? You have to sell your idea. You have to know what problem you're solving, and for whom. Ultimately the buck stops with you since it is your idea and you finding a co-founder is only part of the execution. You can most definitely get by without one, as long as you are executing to your maximum capability.

Don't feel like you have to give up valuable equity to someone who isn't a good fit, or someone who doesn't share the same passion as you about the BUSINESS. That's what is important. Are they going to be there with you 2/3/5+ years?

Anyone can code or be a product manager or throw some designs together. Can they actually contribute to the entire business though? Are they going to help you sell? Will they help you putting out fires on another domain area?

If all you need is someone who can code or some other piece of work, you can just hire a contractor to build your system. You can hire them as an employee later, if all they are is excellent in one area of operations.

Maybe I'm wrong here, but in 2023 with all the tools and technology and access to experts, I don't think you need to worry or get so hung up about not having a co-founder. It is more than just a checkbox because XYZ said I need to have a co-founder. A good co-founder is always rare to find, rather be the best founder for the problem you're trying to solve and things will fall into place naturally.

yes it can be difficult to find people to work on others’ ideas for free.

Let’s also think about this in the reverse. As a potential technical (co)founder how would I validate the business potential of my idea. Irrespective, I am already building it and there is enough complete for anybody to play around with, but not enough complete to fully validate the idea.

So, how would I determine if this thing has business value? This is ah honest question for myself but I suspect if you can answer it you would be a step closer to finding a technical cofounder.

I am based in Beijing, China now, full-time working on 2 AI projects. We are looking for a great technical co-founder. I believe that I am a great serial entrepreneur who can help deal with all business related stuffs and have a good understanding of technology and users.

Drop me an email if you are interested to have a chat: somarco1002@gmail.com !

I feel your pain. Will drop you an email.

My stack is ruby, rails, js/Vue with quasar, PostresSQL and I deploy to my own VPS with dokku. My main focus in on real estate ideas.

Would be good if others join in to make this a matchmaking thread of sorts.

thanks

Can you code?

yes

why is it so hard to find a business cofounder, someone that has sensible understanding of technology, not just throwing around tech jargons?

Not arguing against OP, just asking curiously. I have tried YC cofounder matching and so far every one is so passionate about "AI", but often the idea is ambiguous or impossible.

As somebody who was once seeking to be a technical cofounder, I feel annoyed by how not being the business specialist will always lead to worse contracts and percents for yourself, regardless of the value you bring. And the tasks you have to take up to step outside your technical role are fairly unpleasant too, Eg, researching legal and tax nonsense with no good resources available despite months of searching (the internet is a pit of misinformation, including government sites which are often incomplete or outdated or misleading)

are you offering 50%?

obviously

Reply on news.ycombinator.com