Strange article.<p>Totally unsolicited feedback:
It's kind of hard to convey teachable points when the bulk of the article is opinion related to a story about another person but none of the details are shared. I understand wanting to keep it vague to avoid a dustup with the people involved, but it just felt a bit devoid of specifics. If you're going to use an anecdote, either give us the details or just make fictional and do some character development.
I know HN is largely male and single, so here's my hindsight advice that I'd give myself if I had to do it again (I'm married and went through some #@$%):<p>The girl that ran off with the other co-founder? Just by reading that blog post and not knowing any of them, I am willing to bet there's something in her past that has not been resolved with professional help (i.e. therapist/psychiatrist), and that I am also willing to bet that the co-founder that she ran off with - they probably did not sail of into the sunset and lived happily ever after.<p>If anyone knows for sure that I am wrong - I would be very curious to know, but I'm pretty sure about it. At the surface, humans make their own choices, but there's usually a pattern - as much as we won't like admitting that we can be predictable - being shaped by our parents and upbringing.<p>Some advice that I wish I was told, that I had to learn the hard way:<p>* (Very) Red flag: F'd up parents or f'd up childhood upbringing. You'd think that you're marrying her for what she is today and what she will be tomorrow - but no - all that stuff in the past needs to be dealt with first - and I mean, professionally (therapist/psychiatrist). Maybe obvious, but it's easy to be blinded when you're love. If you meet a woman in a bar for the first time and she casually mentions about this fact in her past: RUN. Move on to the next girl while you have not invested anything in the relationship, before you've now sunk in time, energy, money and emotion.<p>* Go for the outspoken / confident ones. Or at least, do not be fooled: the quiet / shy / low self-esteem types .. could mean that they're just hiding a lot more than you know. The ones who blabber and talk to much? Well, at least you know there's less that they are possibly hiding (generalization of course).<p>* Anyone who's had this happen to them before? NOBODY saw it coming. If this happens, you will <i>always</i> be blind-sided. So therefore, pay serious attention to your due diligence.
Let the startup go. If it was meant to be yours, it will come back to you.<p>Or, for Neil Strauss fans: You have startup one-itis. The best therapy for you is to go start up a new company every weekend.
"If you don't have any co-founders, when you hit that dip, that speed bump along the road, you will be unable to continue."<p>I disagree. It depends how much grit you have. In fact, looking back, I would have been much better off without a co-founder.
<i>I did a lot of follow up work and watched as he basically out competed his old company to pieces.</i><p>I can't help but wonder if the pain of losing so much to his co-founder gave him the motivation to beat his old company and become a success.
Ugh. If there's anything that makes a fight between friends worse, it's women. Having lost a (basically) fiance to a close friend once, I can only imagine how devastating it must be to have business involved as well.<p>The startup crowd is generally okay with instability in life, as it comes with the territory. But kudos to him for being able to get over it, move on, and succeed. Great story.
I don't agree with the inequality of shares when each party is the founder of the startup. I think that everyone should have equal shares. In my experience not having equal shares causes people to gripe over stupid things such as the amount of work to do based upon percentage. It can also breed resentment.<p>Paradoxically to my previous statement, I do agree that a business is like being in a marriage. That means that at times, one party is working harder than the other party.<p>The real key to success with partners is conflict resolution, communication, candor, and empathy.
"took ... my girlfriend"<p>This implies that your girlfriend was something <i>less</i> than a rational, value-seeking adult human being; that you <i>own</i> her, in some respect, as property. This is so completely wrong that I don't think you really meant it, but that's what those words mean.<p>In all realms, including romance, your girlfriend is a free agent, and so are you.<p>And if your former girlfriend just wants whoever has the most money/status, without being valuable in her own right, why do you want her anyway? Contrary to popular conception, love is something you can reason about.
eh, he says "Co-founders are both the most important thing that your company needs and the most likely reason your company will fail."<p>I'm not entirely convinced of #1; a good employee can do nearly all the things a co-founder would, but when they do leave for a real job, (and they will, just like a co-founder will) you have the option of continuing rather than laying down your arms.<p>Really, I think it comes down to the quality of people you can get. If you /can/ get someone better as a co-founder than as an employee, then yeah, having a co-founder might help your survival chances a lot.<p>The quality of people you can get as a co-founder depends largely on your sales skills, though. so if you are as bad at selling as I am, you might actually be able to get /better/ people as employees than as co-founders. Of course, if I was better at selling, and worse at hiring, this would be reversed.
The title is so incorrect. Knowing maxklein is author of this blog, I thought it's his story when he has "My" in the title. He should say - "Someone's co-founder took his company and his girlfriend."<p>Why people skew the titles so much, keep it vague, and sometimes even incorrect to just get the eyeballs?