…ally only one substantive founder and the other one, Paul Allen, does not really make a difference. I think anytime anyone trying to quantify this issue is not an expert on the topics. The answer should be it really depend on the entire scenario. Two heads are better than one is nons…
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.