6
8 Comments

Ask IH: Would anyone be interested in starting a tech cooperative?

Startup Cooperative

I'm thinking about starting a tech cooperative. A group of us will work on various SaaS services and mobile apps, and we'll try a lot of different ideas. It will be like a self-organized accelerator program. We'll be bootstrapped, and there'll be no VCs or investments. We'll also work remotely.

We'll all have an equal stake in each other's projects, which will reduce a lot of risk. We'll also be able to share code and infrastructure, bounce ideas off each other, and join together to focus on the most successful projects. 90% of startups fail, so let's build 20 MVPs and see what works.

I'm just putting the idea out there, and I have no idea if it will work out. But this could be really awesome if we find the right group of people.

  1. 2

    A few thoughts/questions/feedbacks:

    • It only reduces risk for those in the cooperative who have a lower chance of creating a profitable company. I'd imagine most 'better' founders will realise this, so it would surprise me if the quality/potential of those founders taking part is low.

    • De-risking probably isn't that conducive to success anyway (past a certain point). If you know that the expected difference in outcome between you trying your hardest and you doing basically nothing is only 5% (based on you building 20MVPs), then there isn't much incentive to really go the extra mile.

    • Let's say 15 of the 20 projects fail straight away and 5 are more successful. I'm pretty sure that having the teams from the failed 15 projects join the 5 successful ones will result in a worse outcome for the 5.

    • Sharing infrastructure etc sounds interesting. But that itself is an incentive to collaborate. Why complicate things with shared ownership?

    Good luck!

    1. 1

      Hey @louisswiss, thanks for the feedback!

      • There's certainly better founders and better ideas, but even those companies fail sometimes. I think even the best founders will realize that startups are a gamble, and it's usually a good idea to hedge your bets.
      • I understand, but I don't think I agree. I don't think startups live or die based on going the extra mile and putting in that extra 10%. I think that's actually a recipe for burning out and quitting early. It's ok to take breaks and work at a steady pace. You have to put in a lot of work, but it has to be consistent, and usually over a period of 5-10 years.
      • The main idea is that extremely talented people can fail, and that even average engineers can build extremely successful products. Failure doesn't mean that someone is a bad engineer and they'll ruin the outcome of a successful product. VCs and angel investors also understand that you need to bet on a large number of startups.
      • I've been thinking about this with my current project. I want to build some Terraform config that sets up a VPC, Kubernetes, Deis Workflow, Cockpit, Elasticsearch, Kibana, etc. I would open source that under my company name, so that anyone can set up their own infrastructure on AWS. I want to do that because it could bring a lot of attention to my company, and more developers might sign up to use the service. I wouldn't put it in the effort to manage infrastructure or give away AWS credits to random startups unless I had some stake in their success. As another example, the IndieHackers community and Stripe Atlas aren't charities. They encourage collaboration and sharing ideas, and they make it easier to build startups, but this directly leads to more revenue for Stripe. I don't know if that answers the question, but the main idea is just diversification to reduce risk.
      1. 1

        The ideas in your last point sound interesting.

        As for the first three points, we do disagree (except for the second point, which isn't actually what I said at all). I won't go into it in detail here though.

        Good luck with the plans!

  2. 1

    I have a question: how would the co-op decide how much funds to distribute to each member? Would it be a consensus among the members?

    1. 1

      That's a good question. After covering hosting, third-party services, marketing, accounting, legal, etc., then we would just distribute the profits equally. We'd also want the company to have a safe amount of cash on hand so we don't risk running out of money. We could also vote on buying a few websites and apps from flippa.com.

      For some "big picture" ideas about money: The main goal is to cover all of the member's living expenses, so that we can afford to go full-time without worrying about contract work. After that, my goal is for all of the members to end up with at least $3M. If you invest that much in index funds, you'd have an annual income of $100k for the rest of your life. And somewhere in the middle, I would want to start shifting the focus towards non-profit work, and we can start donating money to some good causes.

  3. 1

    Hey @ndbroadbent. Sounds interesting. I need to make a research about your subject.

    1. 1

      Hi @andrewkslv! I just found this article about tech cooperatives, which is very informative: https://www.fastcompany.com/3021964/the-argument-for-worker-owned-tech-collectives

      Note: I'm not interested in starting a coop for consulting in IT and web design. This coop will be more like a worker-owned startup accelerator for "lifestyle businesses".

  4. 1

    This comment was deleted 7 years ago

    1. 2

      Really good points, thanks for the feedback! I definitely wouldn't want to run the risk of people joining and then not doing anything. I'd only consider people who have a track record of launching products. And if someone wasn't pulling their weight, we'd probably vote to remove them from the company.

      So the only thing you can really lose is your time

      Yep, that's the reason why I want try a large number of ideas in parallel. For me, I'm doing part-time contract work while I work on my ideas, and I only work on things that can be profitable from day one. So I don't have any risk of running out of money, but I only have the energy and bandwidth to launch 2 or 3 projects per year. But I would rather be part of a group that's building 20 or 30 projects in a year, and own 10% of the winners. Otherwise it would take me 10 years to try that many ideas. So I guess risk is the wrong word, and it's just about increasing the probability of success.

      At the very least, I've had a lot of good responses, from people like yourself! So it's been a great way to find potential cofounders, even if we end up with a more traditional startup.

      1. 1

        This comment was deleted 7 years ago