One of the most ‘happening’ startup in India of recent times had a ‘maverick’ of a founder at helm, but with a dozen or so co-founders and it floundered.
Things could have been different, if there would have been just a couple of ‘mavericks’ over there.
Mark Suster puts forward another great perspective where he talks about ‘reducing passion’ due to lack of sufficient financial incentive in the long run.
Greater the number of founders, lesser is the incentive in the log run.
While people may argue that money matters in absolute terms, and a 5% stake in a unicorn is more valuable, than 50% in a failed startup. But, as mentioned in the beginning, the chances of reaching the Unicorn status itself reduces manifold, with the addition of each ‘extra founder’ over ‘2’.
More the number of founders, more the chances of conflicts and disagreements, lesser is the compatibility.
“But the worst case scenario in my mind is more than 2 co-founders where everybody sub-optimizes. That said, if you’re already in a company with more than 2 founders — put it behind you. The decision is already made. Your next business will have less ;-)”