And from the point of view of an investor, it makes a lot of sense to have more than one founder. You invest about the same amount as you would with a single founder business but you get double or more the passionate people working desperately to make the business work.
From the point of view of a founder, however, things are very different. Get in a cofounder and you have immediately halved your stake and possible payout. You have also lost a lot of control. You are no longer in complete control of the company - many decisions now has to vetted by your cofounder. Not necessarily a bad thing but there is something to be said - from a self-actualisation perspective - for having complete responsibility for your destiny.
Why give up a substantial chuck of the equity for a "co-founder" when you can bring that same or similar person aboard 6 months later for a percent or two (5 at most) and get the same results.
This line, more than anything else in the last year, is pinging my bubble radar. Ping, ping, ping!
It isn't skydiving without a parachute, but essentially everybody capable of doing a fundable business is also capable of getting a six figure job tomorrow in the current economic environment. If it takes 1.5 to 3 years of your life to discover that the brilliant idea to upend ad distribution through social networks on iPhones was not quite so brilliant, you've very much lost something. (1.5 to 3 years of your life, and, by the way, some money.)
I think this article should be as useful to all you current co-founders, too, as a reminder of the elements to work toward in a genuinely symbiotic partnership.
Excellent advice.
