Would anything change your mind about that? If you wanted to test a hypothesis for a risky business idea and didn't want to sink cash into it, would it be worth it?
Would you prefer a method to pay cash for labor instead?
I think in any potential business venture the team is so critical that I'd go out to people I know to help, even for early prototyping. Admittedly I might not be your target demographic because I can code myself.
So would you prefer a combination of equity and cash? We are always open to ideas and would consider including that functionality. Lots of people seem to be mentioning that concern.
If you guys are actually real, then here is why my first impression was this was a piss-take / joke project:
- The presentation video is slick and has obviously been professionally produced. First impression of the home page on the other side is that it's a very quick & dirty job based on some generic website template. At first sight, it also looks like the site is just the home page and nothing else (tried to fill in the registration form on the home page and it didn't do anything).
So first impression is that you've spent an awful lot of time, energy and money into creating a fancy presentation video but haven't spent any time or resources into the product itself. Which is strange and doesn't give a great deal of confidence.
- The video is essentially a collection of every startup cliché you can think of: "we're creating a social network", "the possibilities are endless", statements about how your product is somehow going to revolutionise local communities, which, to be honest, sound like your typical pure bullshit PR-speak, etc. All filmed in the most stereotypical way I can think of. I'm sorry but my gut feelings here were that none of this was real or genuine.
And then there's those really weird clips of the founder playing guitar or browsing records in a record shop that don't really make any sense. I can only interpret them as taking the piss out of the stereotypical startup founder, who sees himself as a rock star and spends his time faffing around, bullshiting about how he's building the next Facebook, while expecting people to work for him for free / equity.
If this is a real project, then the way to improve this would simply be to focus completely on the product. At the stage you're at, the product is the one and only thing that matters. Fancy videos and big promises only come when you have a product that matches and delivers. Otherwise, it comes across as bullshit. (my personal opinion obviously - others may differ).
Thanks for sharing your opinion. We made the video by creating a listing on our site, issuing alternative compensation, and working with someone to develop it. Our founders are all engineers and designers who work solely on the product, which we admit is not perfect (our product is less than 6 weeks old). We look forward to (hopefully) changing your mind about us in the future.
We agree with you, however, this is a way to turn an idea into a minimum viable product without spending money. This may not be the best way to build a full product, but our philosophy is the more hypotheses you can test without spending cash the better off you are. Thoughts?
With this comment, I lost any faith in this idea as it's clear this is not about both sides deriving value in the process. In your scheme, startup "founders" or really wantrapreneurs get to try out half-baked ideas by giving away worthless equity to folks that are ultimately being duped while idea guys ultimately talk about their MVP and pivots and other bs that people who fancy themselves as startup founders think they should talk about.
On a related note, the "founders" participating in sites like these give a bad name to business people with legitimate biz building skills.
I'm curious about why you think that? Most of the startups that have used our service so far have been started by engineers (including myself) that need help building a product they actually believe in... not just idea people going after the first thing that comes to mind.
Also, when equity has been issued it was typically in the 10-30% range. Essentially, businesses are using this as a way to find partners - not to dupe engineers.
Why would I want to build that product in exchange for equity, which will probably be worthless?
If you don't want to spend money on your idea, chances are it is even more likely to fail than an average startup. This feels like a way to exploit talented and gullible people who want to work at startups.
Why would you ever agree to work for a company that builds useless products, regardless of pay?
In our experience, founders have spent money on their ideas. However, many bootstrapped startups (particularly the hardware engineering companies we have helped) don't have enough for talent and prototyping. When equity is issued these companies are bringing on partners, not gullible engineers. Just my two cents, please let me know if you see it differently.
What did you have in mind? We hear from the community that some combination of equity and cash would be helpful, but I'm curious what other ideas you had?
