Yes You Need a Co-Founder

These become a lot more fun to read (after the 5th one or so) by replacing the debated term with something else. Let's say, 'pants', for instance -<p>Yes, You Need Pants<p>Don’t think about pants in terms of equity.<p>[...]the ideal number of pants is two or three.<p>I feel incredibly lucky to have my brilliant pants[...]<p>Revel in the intensity of your pants team.<p>Oh and if the author happens to be reading, it's 'for all intents and purposes' rather than 'intensive purposes'.

oh my god, give me a break. Everyone has their own opinion on what works for them. Single, co, tri, quad, what does it matter? Sure if you have the perfect people working together in unison then it will be easier. It comes down to YOU, as you allude to. And just because you can't do it alone doesn't mean that you have to lump everyone in together.<p>This is like the NYC vs SF debate, we are like schoolchildren. "My way is better". Now it's the single vs co-founder debate. Statistically, two people starting a company are usually better than one. But remember that every situation is unique, and what works for people works for people. That's the reason that we have so many different types of companies.

I like that he links to how to choose a co-founder down the bottom, but what I want to know, how the hell do you find one in the first place?<p>If your in SF or any other startup hub then thats fine, but what if your in a proverbial co-founder desert?<p>Now my situation will be somewhat unique, being in China and all(not even a big city, some backwater, the main industry here is agriculture, this is China's rice basket) but I really wouldn't know where to start and many others would be the same.

This is that I think.<p>Sometimes finding a "co-founder" could take more time than developing the whole project. Time, that btw, you don't have. Time = Money. Money that you don't have either.<p>So...<p>If I ask you "Name a friend that you would love to work with and believe he is up to the entrepreneurial challenge of this project" and you take more than 10 seconds to figure out who might be suitable for the challenge, you simply don't have one.<p>I believe co-founders, partners (however you wanna call them) is more of an attitude thing than a skill thing. Startups require a lot of balls to jump in, even more if you have a full time job and you need to quit it to get this project on track.<p>Searching for the right partner could be just like waiting for the bus. I could just stay at the bus stop or start walking (coding) to the next stop and then maybe wait there. You could even get to meet your new biz partner half way the road.<p>It's a good head-breaker paradox. Wait till I find someone to work with or simply start doing it by yourself.<p>Partners don't always have to actually START the startup with you. They could jump in at any time and it could be extremely handy. Having an extra pair of eyes and hands is always good (you will have to learn to filter critics that you didn't have before and convert them into feedback)

<i>You cannot do this alone — it is way too hard, both work-wise and emotionally.</i><p>Who's "You"? Does he know every person planning to be a single founder that well?

Generally, articles that make complex issues seem black and white are silly.

i've given up on finding co-founders ....

...Because you're weak<p>Because you can't stand the pain.<p>Because you would like to end up with 10% of the company after working 14 hour days.<p>Because you need someone to complain to after every setback.<p>Because you don't have the money or patience.<p>Because you don't know how to hire the right employees.<p>Because you're not an entrepreneur.