←back to thread

Ask HN: Has anyone quit their startup (VC-backed) over cofounder disagreements?

77 points stuck12345 | 5 comments | 11 Apr 25 16:16 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source

hey fam, i'm at a crossroads where i'm considering quitting my startup and taking a job or alternate paths and wanted y'alls opinion.

i've been working on a startup for the past 24 months with my cofounder - i'm technical and she's mostly focused on business side (with basic frontend skills). we got funded roughly 18 months ago for an idea i came up with, was excited about, and found some traction.

since then we pivoted away from it. we've roughly pivoted almost every month to something new. there is no longer any vision or clear problem we're trying to solve. each month is our team simply fishing for ideas in different industries and domains hoping to strike gold.

my cofounder and i don't see eye to eye on most things anymore and the relationship has also deteriorated significantly. my cofounder and i disagree upon what problems to focus on. for her, ideas only resonate if there are competitors who've raised $X million or hit certain revenue targets with no regard for interest or insights for a problem/industry. i'd much rather work on problems where i have some inherent interest and/or urge to solve the problem but it's hard to drive a shared vision between us both. this is a constant point of friction.

after 24 months of working together, i'm now considering quitting my own startup to either go do another one or take a job where i can find problems and a future cofounder. has anyone been through anything similar in the past? how did you navigate this?

Show context
fzwang ◴[11 Apr 25 17:31 UTC] No.43656317[source]▶
I used to work in VC and have seen a few examples of this. Every case is a little different, but from what you've described I'd focus on salvaging the co-founder relationship. Conflict like this is totally normal. IMO, a pivot is when you change directions based on new information. It sounds like you're not pivoting, but lost. If you haven't already, addressing this head-on and having a candid conversation about being lost would be beneficial. Think of it as an exercise to possibly strengthen your relationship via conflict. Few other thoughts:

1. At this early stage of the business, the core asset is really the co-founding team and their relationship. Conflict is very much normal, but how you resolve it is important. You should be able to articulate your co-founder's concerns. For ex. she might feel the pressure to show "progress" to your investors.

2. It takes a lot of time and energy to build a good working relationship. Moving onto something else might seem like a good idea at the moment, but you could be right back with the same issue with another co-founder.

3. If you do decide to move on, end the relationship as amicably as you can. Note that this is not necessarily the "quickest" route, but it'll help keep your reputation intact.

Edit: spelling.

replies(4): >>43656754 #>>43659805 #>>43661414 #>>43681810 #
willseth ◴[11 Apr 25 18:18 UTC] No.43656754[source]▶
100%. This is an opportunity to lead, not walk away. Maybe he still fails, but it's a valuable learning experience either way and a much better story to tell assuming he wants to found another company. Conversely, walking away in frustration will be a red flag for many investors.
replies(3): >>43657028 #>>43657250 #>>43657816 #
1. tptacek ◴[11 Apr 25 18:43 UTC] No.43657028[source]▶
Counterpoint: unless there's an opportunity for the company to be a success --- which, 18 months into its seed investment, it does not appear to be --- nobody is going to care whether this person stayed on to the bitter end.
replies(2): >>43657150 #>>43659803 #
2. JamesBarney ◴[11 Apr 25 18:52 UTC] No.43657150[source]▶
The ROI of investing another year or two of frustration and failure so a handful of investors might have a marginally better opinion of you is poor to say the least.
replies(1): >>43659824 #
3. willseth ◴[11 Apr 25 23:26 UTC] No.43659803[source]▶
VCs don’t care as much about failure as you might think. They make investments expecting 90% failure and understand that timing and luck are big factors in success, so they are simply looking for people who they believe can lead through rocky stages and navigate difficulty. Assuming you want to continue to be a founder, bailing on the company you founded, even in the face of very frustrating conflict, reflects poorly.
4. willseth ◴[11 Apr 25 23:29 UTC] No.43659824[source]▶
If you don’t care about founding another startup then it doesn’t matter. If you do, than that handful of investors is how you land your next gig.
replies(1): >>43661290 #
5. JamesBarney ◴[12 Apr 25 04:10 UTC] No.43661290{3}[source]▶
There's no guarantee they'll invest in his next startup, even if he stays until the bitter end.

It's also possible that over the next two years, either he or his coworker could damage their relationships with investors. Typically, messy blow-ups reflect far worse on founders than politely stepping away. It often goes better to simply say something like, "Hey, I'm sorry, but I don't think we're aligned anymore. This startup probably works best with just one captain at the helm, so for that reason, I'm out."

Most importantly, even if sticking around for another year or two meant the difference between guaranteed funding and none at all, I'd still choose the extra year or two over the funding. Founders usually earn half—or even a third—of what they would make elsewhere. That extra time essentially translates to a couple of years of self-funded startup runway, and I'd much rather have that flexibility than guaranteed funding with strings attached.