Ha I actually had a similar take. The story started very nicely like a good startup story should and in my mind i thought here is possibly another good story about the pitfalls of doing startups that one can learn from. Then got to the secret part and it kind of just completely vaporized that notion and the story became how a sucker got suckered. but the real downside was that he didn't even get suckered out of that much. he did some prototyping, almost partnered up and then decided they were not a good fit. it's not like the couple and his friend made it so no other yoga apps can be made.
I'm not sure I would call the author a sucker. He had serious reservations from the beginning. His friend? Definitely gullible. But many of the decisions the author made were out of loyalty to his friend, not out of gullibility. From the start he considered the possibility that his friend was brainwashed but gave him the benefit of the doubt. I think that even the least gullible people on HN are susceptible to this.
right, sucker is a bit harsh. Using it emanated more from him loving the secret more than the story that was told. But the point I pretty much failed to make was that if he felt the enterprise to be worthy, but the people not to be, it is something within his control to find new partners or continue, nothing that happened prevented that. But the story dramatizes events to the level of someone having stolen his business dream or some such. Basically, yes it is a crushing experience to lose your innocence and find out someone you highly respect is just out to exploit you, but there's no reason to get it so mixed up with everything.
Yeah when I read that "just so true" part I thought he was either being sarcastic or would come to his senses later in the story. Neither seems to be the case. It is a shame because positive thinking in the form of good old-fashioned optimism is a great thing so long as it is balanced with a healthy dose of realism. Applying positive thought naively and waiting for good stuff to happen to you is sad and embarrassing.
He got suckered out of a lot of his time, and all of the IP he worked on.
Having some aspects of a book resonate with you != being gullible, or a sucker.
The guy in the story seems well intentioned and trusting, but out of his league in dealing with people who are underhanded and nefarious. I think this was a good article about early warning signs for this kind of person, and I'm sure it was a great lesson for him on what to do in the future.
Some lessons spring to mind.
#1 Always expect people to look after their own interests. This is human nature. It also gives you the opportunity to be pleasantly surprised by people who are genuine and principled. As such, you should be creating mutually beneficial and sustainable deals that reflect this reality.
If you let someone have free reign to create whatever structure they want, without any controls or checking, don't be surprised if you don't like the outcome.
#2 Always have some kind of written documentation before any work is done. "We're friends", "We trust each other", "We'll work it out" are not acceptable reasons for not having this documentation. Things, people and friendships change immediately as soon as money is introduced.
Nail down what you think is fair and sustainable, and ask someone to check it. Other businesses or partnerships are a useful yardstick in determining what is fair in your situation. Ask a friend with business experience in these specific kinds of deals to review your structure if your team consists of two friends. Ask a lawyer for anything more involved.
I imagine this story would have turned out very differently if the author had said something along the lines of :
"Listen, I'm excited about what you can bring to the table, and I think you're going to be a very valuable asset to our operation, but in my past experience I've found it's very easy for misunderstandings to happen in any kind of business relationship.
In recognition of this, me and my co-founder have a written document detailing the breakdown of the company, the revenue, and the IP, and we've been best friends for 10 years!
So, I think it would help us build a sustainable and long-lasting relationship if we take some time to think about the value we're all contributing, and the best way for this value to be recognised and compensated in a fair way.
Let me try to get the ball rolling. Based on what you've said, you're able to contribute X and Y. I've asked a couple of friends who know a little about business, and they've mentioned that in the past, they've compensated people providing X and Y by providing them with Z% of revenue sharing for W timeframe. Does that seem fair to you?"
Tanner : "No, thats ridiculous, you don't understand what I'm bringing to your little operation, etc, etc"
"I see, then what would you propose?"
Tanner : "I should get 50% of everything."
"Well, I don't quite see things like that, but I'm open to discussion. Could you provide me with your reasoning behind your figure?"
Then you can take his reasons and consult a friend (or a lawyer).
These are all the kinds of discussions you should be having before the fact, rather than during or after. If you're worried about initiating this kind of discussion, think about how you'll feel initiating it after you've put in 400 hours of work.
#3 Sometimes in order to learn, you have to get burnt. It's very different to read this kind of story compared to experiencing it for yourself, along with all the bundled emotions, shock and gut-wrenching realisations. Accept your failed dealings and failed ventures as valuable lessons that are impossible to glean from any amount of book learnings.
