Advice like this baffles me. Everyone says you need to find a cofounder with skills that are complementary to yours who can compensate for your weaknesses with his skills.
If the OP is good at the business side, let him focus on the business parts and find someone who's good at the technical stuff. Dealing with the mundane business stuff, marketing, raising capital, etc is very valuable and eliminates potentially massive distraction for the technical cofounder.
Business is selling, so if he's any good at it he'll be able to sell himself and his idea to a cofounder without writing a single line of code.
Of course, but the problem is that you can't just show up in SF with some cash and an idea and expect to find a good cofounder. He doesn't have any connections or technical skills. Potential cofounders have no way to judge him or vice versa.
However just because someone doesn't have a proven track record doesn't mean they won't make a good entrepreneur (neither does the converse). The first step to getting a track record is just doing it. Just power through. It doesn't matter if you suck at coding. The business guy who tries to learn and builds a shitty prototype is way ahead of the guy who "just needs the right person". You have to be a problem solver one way or another.
Maybe the solution is to just bite the bullet and hire someone. Maybe it's to go work for a startup for a while. Maybe it's to settle for a shitty cofounder. Maybe it's to build it yourself. Who are we to say what someone's path to success is? The "learn to code" advice is good because it's actionable, shows commitment, and will give the guy infinitely more perspective on all aspects of operating a tech startup.
Business guys with grandiose plans are like professional NNPPs—they talk a big game but they never get anything done. Just start executing.
Comments
Advice like this baffles me. Everyone says you need to find a cofounder with skills that are complementary to yours who can compensate for your weaknesses with his skills.
If the OP is good at the business side, let him focus on the business parts and find someone who's good at the technical stuff. Dealing with the mundane business stuff, marketing, raising capital, etc is very valuable and eliminates potentially massive distraction for the technical cofounder.
Business is selling, so if he's any good at it he'll be able to sell himself and his idea to a cofounder without writing a single line of code.
Of course, but the problem is that you can't just show up in SF with some cash and an idea and expect to find a good cofounder. He doesn't have any connections or technical skills. Potential cofounders have no way to judge him or vice versa.
However just because someone doesn't have a proven track record doesn't mean they won't make a good entrepreneur (neither does the converse). The first step to getting a track record is just doing it. Just power through. It doesn't matter if you suck at coding. The business guy who tries to learn and builds a shitty prototype is way ahead of the guy who "just needs the right person". You have to be a problem solver one way or another.
Maybe the solution is to just bite the bullet and hire someone. Maybe it's to go work for a startup for a while. Maybe it's to settle for a shitty cofounder. Maybe it's to build it yourself. Who are we to say what someone's path to success is? The "learn to code" advice is good because it's actionable, shows commitment, and will give the guy infinitely more perspective on all aspects of operating a tech startup.
Business guys with grandiose plans are like professional NNPPs—they talk a big game but they never get anything done. Just start executing.