First of all, let me make it very clear — I am absolutely not an expert on the topic(s), or at least I have never claimed to be one. All I do is share my thought processes and my reasons behind the mentioned thoughts.
Second, I wish you had gone through the article a bit more detailed than you probably did. The part you mentioned is where I am talking about how many co-founders does a business need, and even if it needs a co-founder. Granted, I did not go into as much details in this particular post as I have in some others, but I have talked about your points of contention. Attached is a screengrab of the section you have an issue with.
- How many co-founders should the startup have is not the critical question (see the quote boxed in red).
- The important question to ask is “What skillsets does the startup need”. Running a startup needs a myriad of skillsets. Either you have those skillsets, or you find people who do possess those missing skillsets.
- “Do I have those skillsets? If you do — great!” → That is precisely what being a solo founder is.
- “Now whether you are able to bring these guys onboard as an employee or as a co-founder” → I guess this is what you are also talking about. Hiring people. That’s exactly what I am saying, aren’t I? However, I am stressing that even if you need to bring onboard a cofounder for those missing skillsets, don’t let the greed to retain equity stop you from bringing one in.
- “Hence two/three heads are better than one.” → If you read that whole segment, you will find that it ends with “the investors’ thought process”. I guess that is self explanatory.
I am not sure where you felt the article disconnected with reality, but I appreciate you taking the time out to share that feedback. Would see if I can present it better going forward to avoid any ambiguity — if it exists in the current article.