Forums: Discussions for entrepreneurs and small business.

Hi, I m looking for a partner over a 5 years already, tech partner who knows to code, make stuff and things.

As you say, if you don't know someone you cant trust them and don't know what they can or cant do.

But I could sell whatever you make, I have many websites which I can use to sell what you can make, and as partners we can share 50/50. I as well have some of my own ideas to make. But I prefer to go with any idea you have.

As you noticed I m not coder, programmer. But I m online worker, webmaster.

I have found a partner whose experience is in managing software engineers and in attempting unsuccessfully to start companies.  He also knows how to write a business plan.

In reading lana's website I have come to realize that the reason to have partnerS plural is that there is a set of skills which are needed in order for a company to succeed.  While one can learn some of the skills, it is helpful to have someone on the team with a natural talent for some of them.

What lana offers, if I understand her site, is that if there is someone who wants to pay money for whatever you sell, and who knows what they want well enough to search, lana makes sure they find your site, and early in their search results.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with that ability, but since posting the original question, my understanding of what I need has changed.

I have been reading some of the Massachusetts state government provided text about how to create a successful business plan.  I have come to understand that those who get initial funding are those who convince the funders that the funders will get paid back.  Anyone who cannot do that will not get money.  Anyone who does that can get money without necessarily having everything in place for whatever other skills they might need, such as lana's.

I have also learned that one of the most important ways in which funders decide whether they think they will get paid back is having someone on the team who has succeeded before.  It matters less whether your idea is any good.  It matters more who you have on the team, at least as far as getting initial money is concerned.  One can begin to see why the odds of success for the funders may not be that good if they concentrate on WHO more than WHAT.  It does, however, mean that they can fund a variety of businesses without having to know much about each specific market.  Of course, the most successful people who start companies either no longer have to work, or can fund their own efforts.  It also limits an ability to have a lot of new companies start.

In that context, one piece of feedback I offer to lana is that her choice to remove any discussion of past projects, and to concentrate on the one project that WILL succeed, causes me to think that she has no projects that HAVE succeeded.  If she went to idealist.org and found organizations to whom she could offer her skills for free, assuming that what she does works, she could then point to instances where she HAS succeeded, which would make a more effective sale to her future customers.  Doubling the hit-rate on a site, for example, would not be a bad thing, assuming she could find some cause she agreed with.

Interesting discussion.

Mary-Anne