The problem: While there are potentially many great co-founders out there, you have no one to work with. This problem has two parts:
A) Not knowing enough people interested in startups.
B) Not knowing if people would make good or bad co-founders.
So this is certainly a step toward solving part A. The problem is it really does nothing toward solving part B, which is by far the hardest part of the puzzle.
I'm sitting here reading news.YC and there are comments from dozens of smart people, some of whom would make great co-founders and some wouldn't. The issue isn't for the most part isn't the fact that I don't know they exist; I know they all exist. The issue is a lack of identity.
If you want to solve the co-founder problem, the solution isn't to get a large amount of people interested in starting companies in the same room. The solution comes from getting them to know each other. This comes from two things:
A) Identity.
B) Interaction.
Identity is 10% what we say about ourselves, and 90% what others say about us based on previous actions. To solve the identity problem you need a way to either aggregate what others say about us or else shine light on previous actions. (Previous actions being anything from college degrees to old blog posts.)
Interaction comes from objects of sociability. Playing games. Breaking a loaf of fresh bread. Sharing a bottle of wine over dinner. A pot of tea. Solving hard problems together. Solving difficult problems together. etc.
Anyway, my point is that the website doesn't solve a problem. At best it is the first 10% of the solution that enables a few people with really good judgement to solve the problem themselves. More likely it encourages people to enter really dangerous territory and potentially get into a lot of trouble with people they barely know.
This points out an unexamined assumption on my part, which was 'getting a large amount of people interested in starting companies in the same room is bound to lead to interesting interactions'. I also assumed people would vet each other, but you're right, it would be more valuable to have other kinds of assessment available.
It sounds like you are saying that the interaction problem is best handled off-line, so is there any website that can really do that?
I recently joined a Meetup group in Baltimore and have already had some great interactions that way. There are far more technical people in my area than I had realized.
Think about it this way. PG built news.YC in large part to get to know people before committing to working with them. News.YC has relevant articles that you can comment on. PG could have just as easily built a site that let you upload your profile pic and interests.
The thing is, uploading a profile pic and interests wouldn't let PG know how smart you are or what your personality is like. On news.YC, users are literally creating their own identities through their interaction with the site and with each other. Furthermore, PG designed the site so that users would interact in a way that would reveal the aspects of their character that are most salient to knowing whether or not they'll build a successful startup or go out and blow his money on hookers and beer.
news.YC is the solution to PG's identity problem. However, the problem of whether or not to fund a group is very similar to the problem of knowing whether or not to work with someone. PG's a smart guy. Think about which parts of his solution are relevant to your problem, and go from there.
Ahh, that is a good direction for the site to go in I think.
My thinking is that YC's problem is mainly figuring out how likely people are to MSPW and how fun they will be to work with.
I am trying to think out how the co-founder problem differs from the YC problem, but I'm not sure which assumptions to use:
1) The productivity of the startup is mainly the sum of the traits of each individual. Plus, to a lesser extent, the synergies between them.
2) The productivity of the startup is mainly an emergent phenomenon that is difficult to predict from looking at either of the two co-founders alone. Plus, to a lessor extent, the traits of each individual. (For example, the output of someone working with Steve Jobs is different than their output in other circumstances.)
Whether it's more of case 1 or more of case 2 matters when figuring out in which direction to take the community, because in each case you are going to want a different systemic design to bring out the different salient factors. (Of course it could actually be case 1 for some startups and case 2 for other startups, which would make the problem even more difficult.)
"1) The productivity of the startup is mainly the sum of the traits of each individual. Plus, to a lesser extent, the synergies between them."
I would argue the synergies between cofounders to be the single most valuable entity in a partnership. You may have complementary skills but if you don't come together and are able to do incredible things that are spurred on by eachother. Spark is key - this linear trait argument isn't correct at all. Never compromise without spark.
You don't know by chatting with someone - best to work on something non trivial together and figure out if you get on.
This seems like it could be an interesting feature idea -- maybe I could include a way for people to solve a problem together after they introduce themselves?
drop....I've considered the Meetup thing myself. Which group or type specifically? In my area, there is a list of about 100 waiting for an entrepeneur's group to start (no one willing to pay the $20 required). I'd do it myself but looking at the waiting list, many seem to be small biz services, accounting, biz planning, or MaryK types.
I joined the entrepeneur meetup group and have been to one meeting; it was 3 people who were in business to cater to small businesses (like accountants and marketing people), and everyone else was technical, so it was a good experience for me. Those three nontechnical people were really good contacts to make. The list you're talking about doesn't sound too promising though.
A few weeks ago there was a thread about starting a free-form way for entrepreneurs to find each other in different cities:
http://news.ycombinator.com/comments?id=445
...so I decided to try setting one up. Please let me know what you think. There's no ads on it or anything, this is strictly a project to make connections and learn more about web development.
Great name for the site. A couple of suggestions: technical strengths and weaknesses are important, but not necessarily more important than general strengths and weaknesses- at least not for a founder. If it was an employee search that would be one thing but I would possibly relabel those "technical & business strengths" etc.
"My dream is to start a company that" should probably be more along the lines of "I have plans and/or interests in the following areas-" I guess I would just step the seriousness up a little bit so you get people who are generally serious partners.
Finally, I'm normally against this, but this is one place where you may want to consider having the site invitation-only, either that or password-protect the site and let the password spread among founder-networked people. A lot of garbage profiles would ruin the usefulness of the site.
[upd]
oh, and one more thing- maybe one more field where the potential co-founder can write about themselves- "about me" or "unique things about me" or something along those lines. Finding a cofounder is a lot about chemistry and an alignment of personalities, not just matching up needed technical skills. It's not a school project, it's more like a.... marriage, to be honest (nothing weird of course).
I like your suggestions about the strengths and weaknesses and dream section. I'm going to go change that right now. My original thought was, I want to really focus on the kinds of motivated technical people reading YCombinator, but you're right, it sounds too much like an employee search.
It also makes sence because people might be looking for skills that are not always technical (or maybe for people who do not self-identify as having technical skills).
As for the name, that is a big relief to hear you say that. My girlfriend thought it wasn't very 'cool-sounding' (i.e. not a web 2.0 name).
I never thought about the potential for garbage profiles. I'm not sure if I could be successful with it by using invitations -- I don't know anyone else in this world (yet).
well, the users would be able to invite. it wouldn't eliminate the garbage, just slow it down. news.yc people would spread the word pretty effectively, I think, or some well placed invitations on facebook, etc.
I have to say that this concept is unfounded on many levels. Case and point being that the basis of a good partnership is a good friendship. If I meet someone on the Internet, my first thought is that they are not who they say they are.
There is no need for social networking to extend to the business concept on this level. If you can not find a founder in your town, in real life, then start a business yourself. Either that, or don't start one at all.
Amazing! I can tell you will be very successful as you have actually done something about the problem - the rest of us (especially myself) sat on our butts bemoaning our fate.
Thanks! This might sound like I'm blowing smoke, but I'm not: I've been really inspired by all of the great articles here and at other sites, and by the 37signals book Getting Real. I grew up very much cultured to think I would have to join a large organization to be successful, and now I'm starting to realize it's better to strike out on my own.
This has been a really interesting 17 hours. I've only posted here and startupping.com and I've received a lot of traffic (a lot for me anyway). One thing I did not anticipate was all of the international visitors. So far there's Sweden, UK, Spain, and Canada. So I am going to add a Country field ASAP. I've never done an international site; are there other things I should keep in mind?
FYI I just now tried to register but kept getting some sort of "something went wrong we've been notified" error. 3:45 pm EST 3/11/07.
On the app - when you say technical do you just mean things like programming, hardware, networking? Certainly more than tech skills are required. Is this site only for those with tech skills where someone a bit softer can find someone?
There are two real problems I see with a site like this-
The first is that the people working on it aren't friends- They don't know each other well, so won't have the relationship to whether what comes..
The second is that people who are pulled together like this are unlikely to care deeply about the same idea..
The idea behind wanting co-founders is people who both believe in a dream, and can help each other through it.. That's not something that a site like this helps with.
well, all I can tell you is that from looking at the logs, there are a lot of people out there who are searching for someone with common interests that they must not be finding through normal channels. I'm especially seeing it with people overseas -- that was a surprise for me. I think that is a strong indicator that YCombinator has large overseas following.
From everything I've read, it's not quite that simple. You don't just pick someone out of a web site to go through thick and thin with, it's a process that takes time. I guess it can't hurt though.
True; I'm just hoping to help make that first introduction. I chose to mimic the craiglist home page by listing cities on the right. I'm hoping that people like me will see their city name their and get inspired to make a connection.
I thought so, because you might want to look for someone who's not as good at something as you are. That's something to consider though; if that ends up giving too many garbage results I can always remove it from the index.
Actually the idea is still nascent even though I wrote it down 10 years ago! But here's another: http://juwo-works.blogspot.com/2007/03/co-founder-match-making.html
interesting! I never thought of coding it up a la a dating site. I wonder what sort of algorithm would work best for that. I don't want it become like eHarmony!
I could add such a questionnaire as an optional part of the process.
A) Not knowing enough people interested in startups.
B) Not knowing if people would make good or bad co-founders.
So this is certainly a step toward solving part A. The problem is it really does nothing toward solving part B, which is by far the hardest part of the puzzle.
I'm sitting here reading news.YC and there are comments from dozens of smart people, some of whom would make great co-founders and some wouldn't. The issue isn't for the most part isn't the fact that I don't know they exist; I know they all exist. The issue is a lack of identity.
If you want to solve the co-founder problem, the solution isn't to get a large amount of people interested in starting companies in the same room. The solution comes from getting them to know each other. This comes from two things:
A) Identity.
B) Interaction.
Identity is 10% what we say about ourselves, and 90% what others say about us based on previous actions. To solve the identity problem you need a way to either aggregate what others say about us or else shine light on previous actions. (Previous actions being anything from college degrees to old blog posts.)
Interaction comes from objects of sociability. Playing games. Breaking a loaf of fresh bread. Sharing a bottle of wine over dinner. A pot of tea. Solving hard problems together. Solving difficult problems together. etc.
Anyway, my point is that the website doesn't solve a problem. At best it is the first 10% of the solution that enables a few people with really good judgement to solve the problem themselves. More likely it encourages people to enter really dangerous territory and potentially get into a lot of trouble with people they barely know.