Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

I have an idea for an app...

  • 14-04-2014 9:20am
    #1
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    There's been quite a few of these threads of late and I thought I'd raise the topic on the basis that many - perhaps the majority - fail to reach any real standard for decent discussion on this or the Mobile Applications forum.

    Note that, this isn't limited to apps alone (the title of this thread could also read "I have an idea for a Web site"), but apps in particular are in vogue for the get-rich-quick brigade and the vast majority of these threads appear to be about them.

    These threads tend to break down into the following types:
    • I had an idea for an app while talking to my mates in the pub last night; please give me lots of advice on it quickly because I'm going to see something shiny soon and forget about it.
    • I have an idea for an app that's going to be bigger than Google. I don't want to discuss it here, but want people to apply to sign NDAs and speak to me about it.
    • I have an idea for an app and want to build it. My budget for this is two Mars bars and a packet of crisps. Don't all apply at once.
    • I have an idea for an app and have done a good bit of research on it. I'm at the point where I have a business plan, some funding and a preliminary spec and would be interested in discussing it's development with a developer with a whom I am willing to pay and/or share equity with.
    As you can see, the running theme in all but the last is someone rushing to build an app based upon nothing other than an idea, maybe a few scribbled concepts and little or no effort to develop it beyond that basic idea. More often than not, there is an attitude that not only are they entitled to free professional advice, but that developers are happy to work for Mars bars and a packets of crisps and that somehow contributing nothing but an idea entitles one to 99% ownership of any business that comes of it.

    To me, this is comparable to "will someone do my assignment" threads, where an OP has not bothered to put in any effort and so ends up polluting the forum with threads seeking others to do it all for them. Rightly, such "will someone do my assignment" threads are basically banned here, because they add nothing to the forum or community and encourage, essentially, laziness.

    While the temptation would be to simply ban such 'idea' threads as well, occasionally you do get the last type, where someone has put in the groundwork and genuinely deserves our attention. It doesn't happen very often, I'll admit, but it does happen.

    The purpose of this thread is to open up to the community a discussion on how such threads should be handled, ideally to define a standard that such threads should meet to be allowed, and if not locked or nuked accordingly, before they suck posters into them.

    Thoughts?
    Tagged:


«13

Comments

  • #2
    Calina
    Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Calina


    Personally speaking, I'd suggest you ban them because the vast majority of them bring very little. Someone who reaches stage four might conceivably be able to put something in the situations vacant sticky; anyone who has invisibleware won't.

    Minimum standard should be a framework for remuneration be it equity or a salary. But then I'm cynical; way back when I used to mod photography we had a lot of issues with people offering wedding photography services or demanding them for free or "exposure" and the gaps between what people were willing to pay.

    I basically think this is the same general idea. I have an idea, you do all the work. Very hard not to be somewhat discerning to say the least if you're the one doing all the work.


  • #3
    Tom Dunne
    Registered Users Posts: 23,212 ✭✭✭✭Tom Dunne


    How about a ''How to ask for advice in developing an app?" sticky or something along those lines?

    l started a similar one many moons ago in the mobiles forum, titled "How to ask for phone recommendations" listing out the basic information required, to counteract to the "what's the best phone?" threads. If posters do not provide the relevant information, then threads can be locked / ignored/whatever.

    While I appreciate the frustration of the regulars in dealing with these threads, I do think there is an unnecessary level of hostility shown to the uninitiated.


  • #4
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Tom Dunne wrote: »
    How about a ''How to ask for advice in developing an app?" sticky or something along those lines?
    I was thinking something similar, as a means to enforce a minimum standard which would allow a culling of the first three types I cited, while still allowing the last.
    While I appreciate the frustration of the regulars in dealing with these threads, I do think there is an unnecessary level of hostility shown to the uninitiated.
    Yes, although this is often frustration with the fact that those posting have made little effort to bring anything other than an 'idea' to the thread. There are often simelar threads on the first page, asking identical questions and it's clear they've not even bothered to check them out before posting. All before you get to the red flag of those who think it perfectly normal to expect others to do all the work while the 'ideas man' brings nothing but the 'idea' to the table.

    This will naturally translate to open attacks by some or, especially in my case, a tendency to be very blunt so as not to beat around the bush if this is another joker.


  • #5
    Tow
    Registered Users Posts: 6,357 ✭✭✭Tow


    I find if you start by telling them the costs up front they will go a way.

    When is the money (including lost growth) Michael Noonan took in the Pension Levy going to be paid back?



  • #6
    IRLConor
    Subscribers Posts: 4,075 ✭✭✭IRLConor


    The Corinthian wrote: »
    My budget for this is two Mars bars and a packet of crisps.

    Maybe in this "how to ask advice for developing an app" thread/sticky we can make it blindingly obvious how expensive software development can be?

    Something like "if your software budget isn't expressed in tens or hundreds of thousands of euro then don't bother asking".


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    IRLConor wrote: »
    Something like "if your software budget isn't expressed in tens or hundreds of thousands of euro then don't bother asking".
    Except then you'll get the Elance argument, where it can be very cheap to develop something. And that in turn will turn into the same tired discussion about the pitfalls of working out outsourced developers and so on.

    Thing is citing Elance/outsourcing is a valid argument as it can be viable if properly sourced and managed. I don't think the problem is that, I think the problem is more one where people have an 'idea' and are either too lazy to do some research before posting and/or too excited by it and so post without having much of a clue on several levels. Much of the problem is that they come looking to build an app before they even know how it's going to generate revenue, let alone have a decent functionality spec.

    A sticky that demands that such a thread should not be a first port of call, and that posters should first do their homework on what they want to do and consider their idea realistically, rather than fantastically, would be a better approach that covers cost and these other factors, IMO.


  • #8
    IRLConor
    Subscribers Posts: 4,075 ✭✭✭IRLConor


    The Corinthian wrote: »
    Except then you'll get the Elance argument, where it can be very cheap to develop something. And that in turn will turn into the same tired discussion about the pitfalls of working out outsourced developers and so on.

    Thing is citing Elance/outsourcing is a valid argument as it can be viable if properly sourced and managed.

    I think the simplest response to "what about Elance?" is "If you're confident that you can get it done to the same quality for lower cost on Elance then you should use it." and don't bother about discussing the pitfalls of outsourcing.


  • #9
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    IRLConor wrote: »
    I think the simplest response to "what about Elance?" is "If you're confident that you can get it done to the same quality for lower cost on Elance then you should use it." and don't bother about discussing the pitfalls of outsourcing.
    You know that's not going to happen and, TBH, discussions about Elance/outsourcing are probably valid topics even here. What I'm suggesting is that such threads be asked to meet certain minimum quality guidelines before posting.


  • #10
    Sparks
    Registered Users Posts: 40,055 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Personally, I think these threads in the majority of cases bring the forum away from what it could be (a place for developers to talk about development and which would as a result be of interest to other developers whether experienced or neophyte) and with few exceptions seem to be written as though this forum had a "GET YER FREE WORK DONE HERE" audio loop playing in the background.

    I think the problem boils down to people not seeing this forum as a place for developers, as opposed to being a collection of developers in one place who're fair game for any recruitment agency or the software industry's equivalent of the guy with the pickup truck looking to hire illegal immigrants off the street corner in Texas.

    I'd rather that stopped. I'd rather it stopped quickly and if banning these threads completely for a time did that even at a cost of potentially interesting ideas, I don't mind doing it even if it seems rude to non-developers. What I'm not sure of is how valuable people feel the exceptions are worth (TC's fourth category above).

    I don't think we can get people to meet standards before posting though, if we could, well, the internet in general would be a far nicer place. Heck, most of the time posters don't read the charters at all even after years in a forum, until they fall afoul of it and you have to point it out to them.


  • #11
    Tom Dunne
    Registered Users Posts: 23,212 ✭✭✭✭Tom Dunne


    Sparks wrote: »
    I don't think we can get people to meet standards before posting though, if we could, well, the internet in general would be a far nicer place. Heck, most of the time posters don't read the charters at all even after years in a forum, until they fall afoul of it and you have to point it out to them.

    I'd have to disagree with you on this one, and here's why. A while back, a few friends and i were chatting about the Internet and this and that (recall that I am living abroad). As most of us were Irish, Boards.ie came up. I was surprised to learn that the general consensus was that the site was "very strict". While I didn't reveal what part I played in that "strictness", I admittedly took a little satisfaction in that perception.

    My point being is that if we implement a policy in this forum regarding this type if thread, I personally think that the stricter we are, the better - people will eventually learn and, you never know, something good might come of it.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Sparks
    Registered Users Posts: 40,055 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Wasn't what I meant Tom - I meant we can't rely on there being a rule in the charter as a way to stop these kinds of posts, we'll have to actually stomp on them actively for a while first :D


  • #13
    Fenster
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,763 ✭✭✭Fenster


    Tom Dunne wrote: »
    I'd have to disagree with you on this one, and here's why. A while back, a few friends and i were chatting about the Internet and this and that (recall that I am living abroad). As most of us were Irish, Boards.ie came up. I was surprised to learn that the general consensus was that the site was "very strict". While I didn't reveal what part I played in that "strictness", I admittedly took a little satisfaction in that perception.

    My point being is that if we implement a policy in this forum regarding this type if thread, I personally think that the stricter we are, the better - people will eventually learn and, you never know, something good might come of it.

    Spend more than five minutes in /r/ireland on Reddit and you'll run into someone whining about their ban.


  • #14
    Sparks
    Registered Users Posts: 40,055 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Fenster wrote: »
    Spend more than five minutes in /r/ireland on Reddit and you'll run into someone whining about their ban.
    Or politics.ie or proc or any one of a dozen other sites...

    ...none of which I'd actually recommend to anyone because the noise/signal level there is so low and they have such a high frequency of turning on newbies en masse for a good old-fashioned lynching...


  • #15
    Tom Dunne
    Registered Users Posts: 23,212 ✭✭✭✭Tom Dunne


    Fenster wrote: »
    Spend more than five minutes in /r/ireland on Reddit and you'll run into someone whining about their ban.

    Do you honestly think I give a damn? :D

    Seriously - let them.


  • #16
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Sparks wrote: »
    I'd rather that stopped. I'd rather it stopped quickly and if banning these threads completely for a time did that even at a cost of potentially interesting ideas, I don't mind doing it even if it seems rude to non-developers. What I'm not sure of is how valuable people feel the exceptions are worth (TC's fourth category above).
    I see your point. As much as I am loathed to see a blanket ban such threads, I'd have to admit that for every such thread that would qualify for the fourth category I mentioned, there's probably fifty that fall into one - or more - of the other three.

    It makes the case for defending the rare 'good' ideas threads very weak, or at least more trouble than they're worth.


  • #17
    ChRoMe
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭ChRoMe


    The Corinthian wrote: »
    I see your point. As much as I am loathed to see a blanket ban such threads, I'd have to admit that for every such thread that would qualify for the fourth category I mentioned, there's probably fifty that fall into one - or more - of the other three.

    It makes the case for defending the rare 'good' ideas threads very weak, or at least more trouble than they're worth.

    Basically if a coherent functional specification is not posted in the OP, it gets binned.


  • #18
    Fenster
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,763 ✭✭✭Fenster


    As Calina mentioned up above, this doesn't just afflict programmers; chancers who want free/cheap services is endemic to all creative fields, to the point that they can't reasonably offer ignorance as defense of the actual costs.


  • #19
    fergalr
    Registered Users Posts: 1,922 ✭✭✭fergalr


    If these threads are to be non banned, then I'd suggest putting up a sticky saying something like:
    "Looking for developers/partners to build your app?"

    We encourage enterprise, and are happy to have people ask for help or feedback on ideas for apps. However, because it costs nothing to post on this forum, but takes everyone's time to read, we want to be sure you've actually thought about your idea a bit.

    To start a discussion, put up a post with answers to the following questions (adapted from ycombinator application):

    - What is your company going to make?

    - What's new about what you're doing?

    - Why would your project be hard for someone else to duplicate?

    - What do you bring to this project? (Only include things that can be measured in objective terms.) (e.g 3 years sales experience, 10k funding, 30 page UI mockup).


    If you don't do that your post will be deleted.


    Why?

    Reasons for:

    - Some serious people do start companies with just equity to split. Some big tech companies have been formed by such relationships, where the non-techie brings other value to the table. I mean, if Steve Jobs was posting here today, looking for Woz, his thread would probably be killed. Is that good? Enterprise does benefit developers.

    Reasons against:

    - People will waste everyone's time by putting forward proposals they aren't serious about.

    Making them answer some basic mandatory questions will make them clear at least some bar. If they aren't willing to answer those questions on a forum thread, then a discussion forum isn't the right venue for them.




    However:

    - When starting out this post, I was thinking "yeah, this should be encouraged". I'm very pro tech-startups.

    - As I write this post, I'm not sure the credibility problem can be solved.

    I mean, I'm reluctant to even answer questions in some of the other threads on careers, because I just don't know what stage people are at as developers; so I don't know if my opinion is relevant.


    I'd suggest try something like this as an experiment, and kill it if we end up with bad threads.

    (Thanks to The Corinthian for raising the issue).


  • #20
    Sparks
    Registered Users Posts: 40,055 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    fergalr wrote: »
    I mean, if Steve Jobs was posting here today, looking for Woz, his thread would probably be killed. Is that good?
    Yes, especially for Woz :D


  • #21
    fergalr
    Registered Users Posts: 1,922 ✭✭✭fergalr


    Sparks wrote: »
    I don't think we can get people to meet standards before posting though, if we could, well, the internet in general would be a far nicer place. Heck, most of the time posters don't read the charters at all even after years in a forum, until they fall afoul of it and you have to point it out to them.

    Regarding the people who just post without reading the charter: you have to take the time to kill their posts anyway. Even if you don't have a sticky with 'the right way to do it'. The sticky might even help. Some % of people will see it, decide to put their post up, just as soon as they get around to answering the questions in the template - and that's them nipped in the bud :-P
    ChRoMe wrote: »
    Basically if a coherent functional specification is not posted in the OP, it gets binned.

    This is in the spirit I'd be going for. But everyone's 'functional spec' will be different. If there's instead a defined template (i.e. a set of questions the first post must address) then maybe it'd catch on.



    I totally see the perspective wanting to just keep the threads banned though. It'd be hard (impossible?) to make work properly, and maybe its not worth it.


    But... the things we could have would be nice... sigh...


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Trojan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,402 ✭✭✭✭Trojan


    simons_graphs_02.gif

    🎙️ The Recognized Authority Podcast



  • #23
    roboshatner
    Registered Users Posts: 775 ✭✭✭roboshatner


    I have an idea do not tell anyone about the idea.
    The Corinthian wrote: »
    There's been quite a few of these threads of late and I thought I'd raise the topic on the basis that many - perhaps the majority - fail to reach any real standard for decent discussion on this or the Mobile Applications forum.

    Note that, this isn't limited to apps alone (the title of this thread could also read "I have an idea for a Web site"), but apps in particular are in vogue for the get-rich-quick brigade and the vast majority of these threads appear to be about them.

    These threads tend to break down into the following types:
    • I had an idea for an app while talking to my mates in the pub last night; please give me lots of advice on it quickly because I'm going to see something shiny soon and forget about it.
    • I have an idea for an app that's going to be bigger than Google. I don't want to discuss it here, but want people to apply to sign NDAs and speak to me about it.
    • I have an idea for an app and want to build it. My budget for this is two Mars bars and a packet of crisps. Don't all apply at once.
    • I have an idea for an app and have done a good bit of research on it. I'm at the point where I have a business plan, some funding and a preliminary spec and would be interested in discussing it's development with a developer with a whom I am willing to pay and/or share equity with.
    As you can see, the running theme in all but the last is someone rushing to build an app based upon nothing other than an idea, maybe a few scribbled concepts and little or no effort to develop it beyond that basic idea. More often than not, there is an attitude that not only are they entitled to free professional advice, but that developers are happy to work for Mars bars and a packets of crisps and that somehow contributing nothing but an idea entitles one to 99% ownership of any business that comes of it.

    To me, this is comparable to "will someone do my assignment" threads, where an OP has not bothered to put in any effort and so ends up polluting the forum with threads seeking others to do it all for them. Rightly, such "will someone do my assignment" threads are basically banned here, because they add nothing to the forum or community and encourage, essentially, laziness.

    While the temptation would be to simply ban such 'idea' threads as well, occasionally you do get the last type, where someone has put in the groundwork and genuinely deserves our attention. It doesn't happen very often, I'll admit, but it does happen.

    The purpose of this thread is to open up to the community a discussion on how such threads should be handled, ideally to define a standard that such threads should meet to be allowed, and if not locked or nuked accordingly, before they suck posters into them.

    Thoughts?


  • #24
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    ChRoMe wrote: »
    Basically if a coherent functional specification is not posted in the OP, it gets binned.
    As fergalr pointed out not everyone actually knows what a functional specification is, let alone a coherent one.

    I would have to think about what would be necessary for such a guideline sticky, but I could probably summarize in quite quickly for those here; do your homework before posting.

    I began this thread with the view that such threads should be allowed, under strict quality guidelines, because there are some genuine, clued-in, people out there. Thinking on it, these are so rare that the whole thing may not be worth the effort.

    Still, the way I view it is if you place posting guidelines on this subject, the reality is that the idiot ideas men are not going to bother to read them anyway, because their modus operandi is typically based on laziness. They're going to post regardless.

    So, I'd probably still advocate such a guideline be stricter, giving clear instructions on what is or is not acceptable and then have a final caveat at the end:
    "When posting, you should acknowledge at the end of your post that you have read these guidelines and are adhering to them. Failure to do so will result in the immediate deletion of the thread regardless of whether you have followed these guidelines or not."

    Why do that? Because lazy people don't ever read to the end of things (there used to be a solar power battery recharger app that half way through the description admitted that it was a joke meant to fool people to lazy to read the full description) and it would be a quick and easy way for a mod (or reporting user) to check if they've really read the guidelines.

    Meanwhile regardless of a ban on such threads, the obvious idiots are going to post anyway. So this would at least give those who are serious enough to post properly a chance to do so, while making no difference to those who are not, in terms of posts that will get quickly banned.


  • #25
    Evil Phil
    Registered Users Posts: 7,468 ✭✭✭Evil Phil


    There is no commercial posting allowed on the forum, and we can just delete the crap. The Situations Vacant sticky states that
    Positions advertised that are offering equity instead of salary in return for work will be deleted immediately.

    We could always promote that to the forum charter. There will always be "it's like ____ but for _____" pitches, and there will always be those who want an NDA singed before sharing their vague idea for "I can computers".

    It is hard to police, we can always add a new section to the charter, much like the Asking a Question section, How to Start Up or something, lets see how the thread progresses before putting it in place.

    I've recently just backed out of start up that had strong market research to support the concept. Problem was, as developer I was going to have to do 90% of the work, but as it wasn't my idea I was being offered 30% of the equity. That offer didn't budge so I said good luck and moved on. But the concept was strong and work had already been done, that's why I got involved in the first place. This is exactly why Point 4 should be the example, in my opinion.


  • #26
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Evil Phil wrote: »
    There is no commercial posting allowed on the forum, and we can just delete the crap. The Situations Vacant sticky states that
    Not all such threads seek to hire developers, so while that would cover some such threads, it won't cover all of them (notably the one's looking for ballpark quotes).
    I've recently just backed out of start up that had strong market research to support the concept. Problem was, as developer I was going to have to do 90% of the work, but as it wasn't my idea I was being offered 30% of the equity. That offer didn't budge so I said good luck and moved on. But the concept was strong and work had already been done, that's why I got involved in the first place. This is exactly why Point 4 should be the example, in my opinion.
    Well, this is because people get emotional about their ideas and end up overvaluing them because they cannot objectively assess them. And because they overvalue the importance of their idea, they end up overvaluing their own role and get very upset when you point out that in reality they're not really bringing much into the venture.

    As the expression goes; ideas are like assholes, everyone's got one. And the reality is that in most cases, the would-be entrepreneur is more likely to make money out of using their former than their latter.

    However, you're right, these 'ideas' can be of interest to developers when the homework's been done and that's why, I suspect, there's still interest here in avoiding a blanket ban.


  • #27
    fergalr
    Registered Users Posts: 1,922 ✭✭✭fergalr


    Evil Phil wrote: »
    I've recently just backed out of start up that had strong market research to support the concept. Problem was, as developer I was going to have to do 90% of the work, but as it wasn't my idea I was being offered 30% of the equity. That offer didn't budge so I said good luck and moved on. But the concept was strong and work had already been done, that's why I got involved in the first place. This is exactly why Point 4 should be the example, in my opinion.

    There's another side to this coin, too.

    When I read that post, my first reaction was "the development is NEVER 90% of the work".

    There's pretty much no opportunity you can pursue, where the tech is 90% of the execution.
    Techies think there is, until they try it a few times.

    Now, that particular post was written by 'Evil Phil' who I know is very smart from his other posts, so its probably an exception.


    But, in general, while archetypal business person totally underestimates the tech part, please remember archetypal tech person (yes, you, dear reader) totally underestimates the non-tech part, too.


    There's also the vision, the planning, product management, marketing, marketing, marketing, marketing, sales, sales, sales, sales, accounts etc.


    Yes, most people who come looking for you to build tech for them don't have the non-tech skills to equal the years of tech training you've done.

    But the few that you'd actually want to work with do. In those circumstances, an equity split is reasonable.

    And you telling them that the project is entirely about the tech is generally as stupid as them asking you why you can't build a distributed facebook in an evening.


  • #28
    Sparks
    Registered Users Posts: 40,055 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    It's probably *very* worthwhile pointing out that equity splits are not even in the same room as simple percentage splits when you start thinking about dilution, let alone the fun and games that surround options, vesting and all the other lovely ways to make "30%" worth about as much as the lint in your left pocket...

    And if the company can't get off the ground at all without the tech and the tech is one guy's invention, then there'd better be a very good reason why he's not getting an equal share of the equity before the first angel ever shows up...


  • #29
    fergalr
    Registered Users Posts: 1,922 ✭✭✭fergalr


    Sparks wrote: »
    It's probably *very* worthwhile pointing out that equity splits are not even in the same room as simple percentage splits when you start thinking about dilution, let alone the fun and games that surround options, vesting and all the other lovely ways to make "30%" worth about as much as the lint in your left pocket...

    Valuing equity or percentage split or anything is obviously fraught with difficulty and has many pitfalls, as you point out.

    At the same time, there are standard patterns to deal with these things now.

    If someone is talking about 30% equity in their startup as a founder, they tend to mean 30% of the common stock of the startup, but restricted subject to vesting (generally 4 years with a cliff.)

    If the other parties are serious, that should compare favourably to the pocket lint. At least in terms of expected value.

    Dilution should ideally only happen during an event that increases the value of the company, too...
    Sparks wrote: »
    And if the company can't get off the ground at all without the tech and the tech is one guy's invention, then there'd better be a very good reason why he's not getting an equal share of the equity before the first angel ever shows up...

    Absolutely - when I hear 30%, I think '3 founders'. Or maybe if the other founder is contributing substantial capital, or existing progress (substantial meaningful progress).

    I'm not commenting on any particular situation here, such as Phil's above, just general thoughts.


  • #30
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Sparks wrote: »
    And if the company can't get off the ground at all without the tech and the tech is one guy's invention, then there'd better be a very good reason why he's not getting an equal share of the equity before the first angel ever shows up...
    A business partner partner from an accounting background may be a natural fit for the role of CFO of a venture, a developer CTO, a marketeer Marketing Director and so on. But often the 'ideas man' will become CEO, not because he or she has any aptitude for the role, but out of a combination of vanity and because they're not actually 'qualified' for anything else and reckon they'll learn how to be one along the way.

    But for the accountant, developer or marketeer looking to join such a venture, what they see is the long term - one where they bring value to the firm and the 'ideas man' is little more than dead weight coming along for the ride. Certainly the 'idea', if successful, has some value, but not to the point that all that remains for those who bring real (not speculative) and practical value is the crumbs from the equity table.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    Evil Phil
    Registered Users Posts: 7,468 ✭✭✭Evil Phil


    Let me clarify: As developer (or future CTO) I was not only going to be developing the application, but was also doing a "developing' a lot other stuff. Like making the solution fit today's market, work out the pricing, how we we're going to manage invoicing and payment, where the office was going to be located, what bank were we going to us, what kind of company were we going to incorporate more and more of this fell to me. A lot of that stuff is marketing I guess, but you can see why I backed out.


Advertisement