"... I knew I would probably get attacked on this post in some way. I am not naive and I do realize my limitations. Additionally, in a business you are looking ideally for individuals who complement yourself in skills (i.e. one business person, one technology person). ..."
Hi Mel, normally I'd be ripping into a "business" founder as well. Well until I was re-reading "Founders at Work" [0] and come across Mitch Kapor. It made for very interesting reading and totally made me re-think non-tech founders. You see Mitch came into developing right at the start of the Apple ][ software building a companion bit of software for VisiCalc called VisiPlot (TIny Troll).
'... I was totally ignorant how long things took
I had no background in computer science. I
was self-taught -- I was still writing in Basic. I
had no management experience; I was in
business school ... I was a transcendental
meditation teacher and a mental health
officer ...' [0]
Now Mitch got himself hired as a product manager as a way to finish his product. With limited recognised "professional credentials" he was sidelined by the software publishers he was working for so he went back to finishing product. Now comes the interesting bit. First he recognised good technical people and seized on the fact that the VisiCalc publishers ignored the technical problem of data-exchange and [1]. Mitch also took advantage of the business in-experience of Software Arts by licensing his software at 33% above SA's gross margins. [2]
Then several things happened that played to his advantage mainly through other people severely underestimating his technical & business abilities. A) He was bought out of the royalty agreement for his licensed software (US$1.2M), convinced them his non-compete was not applicable to their product, hired key technical staff to re-build another product with spread sheeting & graphing & releasing the product as a second generation product to the new IBM PC.
Now I really must have glossed over this bit the first time. I didn't realise Mitch was a non-technical. He was completely underestimated and written off by people with "technical". So what did Mitch really do that stood out?
- created product
- recognised that change (new hardware) brings opportunity
- could read people better than given credit
- recognising technical weakness & hiring well
- killer business instinct
So don't let the negative replies curb your determination. Now 2 questions. Are you still at school or have contact with places where people learn to get a co-founder? Is the fact that best friends (potential co-founders) are normally of the same sex a key factor in finding a co-founder?
[1] Ibid, p91. In the Apple ][ there was not enough memory to save data b/w applications and Mitch saw the potential key technology enabling seamless data transfer via floppies.
Hi Mel, normally I'd be ripping into a "business" founder as well. Well until I was re-reading "Founders at Work" [0] and come across Mitch Kapor. It made for very interesting reading and totally made me re-think non-tech founders. You see Mitch came into developing right at the start of the Apple ][ software building a companion bit of software for VisiCalc called VisiPlot (TIny Troll).
Now Mitch got himself hired as a product manager as a way to finish his product. With limited recognised "professional credentials" he was sidelined by the software publishers he was working for so he went back to finishing product. Now comes the interesting bit. First he recognised good technical people and seized on the fact that the VisiCalc publishers ignored the technical problem of data-exchange and [1]. Mitch also took advantage of the business in-experience of Software Arts by licensing his software at 33% above SA's gross margins. [2]Then several things happened that played to his advantage mainly through other people severely underestimating his technical & business abilities. A) He was bought out of the royalty agreement for his licensed software (US$1.2M), convinced them his non-compete was not applicable to their product, hired key technical staff to re-build another product with spread sheeting & graphing & releasing the product as a second generation product to the new IBM PC.
Now I really must have glossed over this bit the first time. I didn't realise Mitch was a non-technical. He was completely underestimated and written off by people with "technical". So what did Mitch really do that stood out?
- created product
- recognised that change (new hardware) brings opportunity
- could read people better than given credit
- recognising technical weakness & hiring well
- killer business instinct
So don't let the negative replies curb your determination. Now 2 questions. Are you still at school or have contact with places where people learn to get a co-founder? Is the fact that best friends (potential co-founders) are normally of the same sex a key factor in finding a co-founder?
[0] Jessica Livingston, Founders at work, Ch6 Mitch Kapor, pp 90-93
[1] Ibid, p91. In the Apple ][ there was not enough memory to save data b/w applications and Mitch saw the potential key technology enabling seamless data transfer via floppies.
[2] Ibid p92.