I am a single founder. Here at Y Startup I have found that the predominant opinion is that anyone over 30 is, or should be DEAD. In the real world I find that if your not under 30 (me 48), doing a startup with a co-founder is not likely. Young people are intimidated by your age (discrimination?), and most older people have responsibilities beyond themselves which prohibit taking serious risk.
If your like me and have made your bones, and bucks, the risk is non existant. Necessity being the mother of invention, I forge ahead alone, though I often wish I had a partner. I have heard the comments by VC that a single founder model usually fails. I think that is valid. In my circle, I don't know any other single founders, so subjectively speaking it seems that the VC guys are right.
I believe it takes a psychologically unique individual to go it alone. We are as a species evolved to work best in a tribe. Those who stand apart from the tribe and are successful are few and far between.
My list of downsides are:
You make every decision alone.
By definition there is no synergy in a singularity.
VC perception is against you. If your not self funded, your going to have a hard slog finding funds from this group. Keep in mind that poltically speaking, manipulating founders is part and parcel of the VC game. A game made more difficult in a single founder model.
During the early stage, pre employee, you have to be a bright and lucky person to make every right decision on your own. You will make more mistakes.
You better be disciplined. If not your going to fail alone.
The upside you ask?
Only one that I can think of and that is that at the end of the day, since the system is so stacked against you, if you make it, you own it. And that has tremendous rewards. For me it meant very very early exit from traditional work patterns. CHOICE, CHOICE, and more CHOICE about every aspect of what I do. No one interferes in any way when you pay your own way. But, the old saying that its lonely at the top, is no lie. If you can handle that, the rewards are worth it.
Are you really good at everything you need to create a startup? If it's a web startup, I'd say the FIRST team you need is a designer and a few programmers. Nothing else.
So, as a single founder, are you doing everything? Or are you using the "bones" you've made to hire employees? If you have employees, then you really aren't benefiting that much from being a "single" -- you have a team, they are just compensated and motivated in a different way.
In my experience, a person who feels like a co-founder is a billion percent more motivated than an employee or consultant. Given this (and given that you need more than one skillset to build a good startup) why wouldn't you trade some equity to increase the motivation of your team? Surely this would raise your chances for success (which, as we all know, are generally pretty low!).
Unless you are one of those mythical people who are good at everything, you are handicapping yourself. And it's a pretty well-researched fact that two smart people are more effective problem solvers together than one genius.
But, at 48, that may be be necessary... As you say, who wants to partner with an old guy? grin
For the record, I am a 35 year old guy who has also made his bones selling two startups (just about to launch #3). Every time (including this one) I have have made damn sure that I had co-founders that had EQUAL partnership (when I could have gotten away with giving them minority partnership each time).
If your like me and have made your bones, and bucks, the risk is non existant. Necessity being the mother of invention, I forge ahead alone, though I often wish I had a partner. I have heard the comments by VC that a single founder model usually fails. I think that is valid. In my circle, I don't know any other single founders, so subjectively speaking it seems that the VC guys are right.
I believe it takes a psychologically unique individual to go it alone. We are as a species evolved to work best in a tribe. Those who stand apart from the tribe and are successful are few and far between.
My list of downsides are:
You make every decision alone.
By definition there is no synergy in a singularity.
VC perception is against you. If your not self funded, your going to have a hard slog finding funds from this group. Keep in mind that poltically speaking, manipulating founders is part and parcel of the VC game. A game made more difficult in a single founder model.
During the early stage, pre employee, you have to be a bright and lucky person to make every right decision on your own. You will make more mistakes.
You better be disciplined. If not your going to fail alone.
The upside you ask?
Only one that I can think of and that is that at the end of the day, since the system is so stacked against you, if you make it, you own it. And that has tremendous rewards. For me it meant very very early exit from traditional work patterns. CHOICE, CHOICE, and more CHOICE about every aspect of what I do. No one interferes in any way when you pay your own way. But, the old saying that its lonely at the top, is no lie. If you can handle that, the rewards are worth it.