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.
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!
Hey @louisswiss, thanks for the feedback!
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!
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?
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.
Hey @ndbroadbent. Sounds interesting. I need to make a research about your subject.
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".
This comment was deleted 7 years ago
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.
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.
This comment was deleted 7 years ago