us

Try it. You'll never know what you are okay with or aren't okay with unless you try it.

I completely disagree with Robert Scoble. If anyone has ever attended a TC50 or TC Disrupt event AND Launch, it's like a day and night comparison. While I don't have exact numbers, TC events were by far much MUCH more crowded both in the demo pit area as well as those pitching on stage. I swear it was like a ghost town at Launch in comparison.

The quality of startups sucks and I'm not sure I can agree there were a lot of press there BUT to be fair, this is not an area I can really comment on since I wasn't paying attention to this are much (regarding press).

Most of the people in the demo area didn't really have anyone else to talk to except other startups that were there. It was dead. And while I have nothing against Launch personally, I'd probably never attend again if this is how it'd always end up. BUT to be fair to Jason and Launch, it is their first "Launch" event so I'm hoping this will vastly improve.

While I strongly agree that no product is ever finished and improvements can always be made, I do want to make a statement in regards to a comment you've made in reply about "more to add". Sometimes improving means removing as well and sometimes it does mean adding, or just changing something. It depends.

That said, just because adding something makes the product better, does NOT mean it always make sense. There was a story about another company who, because of customer feedback, ended up building a bunch of features into one of their products. Turns out, only a small minority of their userbase even cared to use those features and that the mass majority were fine with the features that were already there. In hindsight, they said it was wasted time and resources and really didn't add much to the bottom line.

Also, rather than believe what you're doing is "better" or an "improvement", things should be split tested and verified as to whether you should spend time and resources. While I don't disagree that you can do more with any given product, the question you really should be asking is are you wasting your own time and that of your employers with these things you want to improve or add. Remember, opinions don't mean shit. Hard data does.

Split test this yourself. Every situation is different

This is 100% dependent on the type of extension you're building out. Without knowing more about the nature of the extension, it is extremely difficult to recommend a proper monetization model. Who are the target audience? Is there a built-in model you can leverage? Too many unknowns to recommend anything valid. It's like asking how to monetize a website. General advice won't help much...

None, still working like a horse

Perhaps that was bad wording, I edited it. Let's talk about $36k to $60k depending on location.

No downvote open yet

1. It is common place as f'd up as that is.

2. A lot of times, for higher level positions, it'll catch on fast and it's not uncommon for people to be let go.

3. As to whether or not you should let the company no, this part is tricky. The right thing to do is obviously tell the company whether or not she could perform the tasks. The problem though is it may ruin your relationship. It would have been better to prevent it from happening but what's done is done.

In reality it's not really your place to interfere but you're going to have to make a judgement call on whether or not you want to step in on this.

Spread the word

Funny, I think they feel the same way about you if they even knew you existed. ^_~

Wow, I gotta give mad props. Very awesome

It's "met", not "mat".

1. I wasn't referring to him learning how to code. You missed the analogy completely. I was arguing that he wouldn't want to work with you if you didn't know how to code so why are you working with him if he knows nothing about business. Each partner needs to bring a certain level of skill set to the table.

2. He thinks wrong. A good business cofounder, even if he doesn't know something, would strive to figure it out and get things moving. Not wait till you should have something to do.

3. You should do this part asap. You'll regret it later if things go sour. Look up vesting if you're not sure what that is.

I've been on both ends of the startup spectrum so allow me to elaborate a bit.

1. No one wants to partners with a guy that can't code and hope he can learn to become a technical cofounder from scratch. Typically speaking, you find someone with coding chops. The same is true of business cofounders BUT unfortunately most idiots don't realize they don't have the business knowledge needed to be a good business cofounder.

2. Your cofounder should NOT be waiting around for the product to finish to do his part. There is a SHIT TON of stuff a business cofounder can do while waiting for the prototype to finish. In my honest opinion, if he doesn't know what to do, he should be hauling ass to figure this out or he's not pulling his weight. I'd argue that in the long haul, while the technical guy mostly codes and do some of the other stuff, the business guy got a lot on his plate. If he sucks now, he'll do even worse as time progresses.

3. I hope to god you guys formed a business, have vesting in place, and so that if things don't work out, you're not going to run into more issues than necessary to make this separate clean. And no, just because you guys agree to separate on good terms does not make it clean. There is a process for this.

1. Any company that relocates you would probably only do so if they believe you're the right fit and will perform well. Startups require a lot of work. Most people that works for a startup do not work a typical 40 hour week, especially the first hires. Culture fit and time invested is a huge deal for a lot of startups.

3. Most offer just salary and possibly equity. It's common until the company grows bigger.

1. Depends on what the OPs goals are. Most scalable startups register C corps in Delaware. Of course if he's not planning to raise, scale a large size startup, etc.. this may not apply.

2. If the above is true, I would highly recommend against using services such as LegalZoom. Nothing against them, but to get stocks issued, all the paperwork done correctly, bylaws written, etc etc etc... Is not something I would rely on LegalZoom to get done. You need a proper attorney for that. Again, depends on what exactly he's trying to do.

I did a B2B startup previously. We went to industry events and conferences and connected with other businesses and contacts. While that is not the only strategy, it is a good one.

Holy cow, can we please format that post better.

I don't know about other businesses, but for me, unemployed or not, degreed or not, I am willing to hire anyone who is talented at what they do. The problem is finding the right talent and the right fit that benefits both the employer and the employee (at least in startup culture).

Congrats! Keep moving forward...

See here: http://techcrunch.com/2011/02/16/google-new-toolbar/

Assuming it's done correctly, I think it'd be useful for many to explore other ways to monetize their business that they may not think of.

The only problem with this example is not every software engineer has the ability to be an entrepreneur. Sure, they can create monumental value for their employers, but there are some people that just can't be founders or cofounders or anything more simply because of how they are. I know quite a few people like this. At the end of the day, it takes a variety of personality traits, skills, brains, and a slew of other things to create a well rounded individual who can maximize value. Outside of this, no matter how much value you're adding to your employer, how can you honestly say you're worth more.

1. The company you want to approach should be something you're interested in. You don't want to just join any random startup. Relocating from Dallas to the Bay is a huge difference (I know because I lived in Dallas for 9 months before). The cost of living here is much higher so unless you've got something lined up, you probably don't want to move here as any savings you might have will dry up fast.

2. Risk depends on the individual. You have to access the company, the vision, any funding they've received, etc... among several other factors, and determine whether or not this is a fit for you.

3. To answer this part, why part of a startup if you just want a perm job?

Get a merchant account if you can. Shop around. Although I haven't tried Fee Fighters, seems like it would be a good place to start for looking up a merchant account: http://feefighters.com/

Also merchant accounts often have a separate gateway but some banks own their own gateways which saves you money on top of the rates you negotiates. Factor this into the equation when you're shopping around.

Fair or not is an entirely different argument. The purpose of this whole thing was to demonstrate whether or not Watson was capable of thinking more inline with human thought processes rather than base on static data. I think this is the beginning of an amazing advancement.

You probably don't qualify. Entrepreneurs should only accept money from an accredited investor. If all you have is low tens of thousands, very high chance you're not accredited. Meaning no one should be taking money from you.

I agreed up till your last statement. They would have developed it if it meant more ad dollars as well.

Not really. I'm just interested in seeing how long people typically take to build their prototype in general. Let's be honest here. Two people working on the same type of startup could spend totally different amounts of time coding out a prototype depending on what they want in it and features even if both were coded by equivalent coders. There's no real way to measure it even if I did ask people specifically what they're building out.

Rather, it just makes it easier to see the average time people spend building something and getting it to market instead. The data may not be very useful to others but it gives me a good understanding of what I'm looking for.