drinko

I've seen it, and have it running on my server in alpha.

it didn't.

thanks for the support benn.

She wasn't initially hired as an employee - it was more of a contract agreement to develop the beta, with the option to come on as a full partner if we were working well together.

It wasn't a hazy equity offer.

the non intuitive nature of some of the UI features.

Instructional copy is written, but not implemented.

Lack of help - again written, but not implemented.

Lack of privacy settings.

Inability to search.

29% can be reclaimed in a straightforward manner.

nostrademons, please re-read the original post.

I never had 94%

I was eventually ok with giving up founder level share, but expected founder level commitment. This is where the gap lies.

nostrademons

I paid the 35% equity 8 months ago, only to have her quit when the going got tough.

She left because we ran out of money.

Scope creep was limited.

The company owns the IP - we did sign paperwork on that.

In case it isn't clear, at the time I did agree to giving her the 35% in equity. I currently own 45%.

She has agreed to documenting and transitioning the app.

I don't have any programming experience beyond BASIC as a 5th grader.

Market research, ethnographic study, trying to raise more funding,(too early for VCs here, and there are not many risk taking angels here), running the ongoing alpha, liaising with patient groups, and health organisations, writing copy and designing interfaces. Learning about tech startups is a phase transition from the perspective of a nurse.

I raised the funding, performed the market research, liased with many different health organisations, classifed the information in the database, wrote all the copy for the app, and created the interface mockups working with a designer.

pg,

The idea was that always that she would be a full co-founder. We agreed on a low equity split initially because of the asymmetric risk we were taking. The idea was always to increase her stake 6 months into the project, but not in the way it happened.

I met her through a friend, and 3 months ago would have been proud to call her my cofounder.

I am going to learn to hack regardless, I am just trying to figure out the best way forward in the short term, as the payoff for learning to hack will be a few months.

The investment round was 20%, and I have a 45% stake.

Well, my monthly outgoing are $2000 a month, so it kinda feels garagelike to me.

"this is a set of circumstances where the developer had most of the leverage, you failed to recognize it and got burned"

This is true to a degree. We agreed to the initial arrangement as a fair deal, but I didn't appreciate the way she swtiched terms on me, and then bailed when the going got tough. (ie funding ran out)

I had to take a salary, because I am 32 yr old experienced nurse and have monthly fixed costs that I can't get away from.

I can recover the extra 29%, as it was structured as an option.

no project contract was signed - I was naive and had met her through a mutual friend, so I thought I could trust her and we could save some money.

There is a contract for the company set and equity structure.

i am near Tulsa, Oklahoma.

We have a prototype, but not one I would be able to release, as it needs a lot of user interface refining.

It is an online web app service for patients with chronic conditions that helps them manage their problems and has some social network features. (I am a nurse)

I guess it depends on who your friends are, but mine have no clue. Part of the trouble is that awful name.

Thanks Erf

The reason that I think it is actually useful is that although joe six pack may think that facebook, myspace, friendster and second life are all social networks and therefore the same type of product, it is clear that small differences in product management have led to big differences in the real world outcomes.

For example: facebook/myspace (real names/screennames) second life / facebook /friendster (imagined identity vs real identity) myspace/facebook (self expression through profile hacks and bling/facebook apps)

In addition, I think that the actual products when verbalised, sound quite ridiculous. However, they have been enormously successful. There is a lesson there.

Finally, the video showed me how fragile the social network space really is as the cycles of innovation change. My perspective has shifted from that of a facebook fanboy to a FB hater a la Matt Maroon, and I now think that facebook is much more vulnerable that anyone would have thought 12 months ago. This video reinforced that for me.

Apologies to those who felt antagonistic towards seeing this here. I think that it eloquently sums up what is often discussed on blogs like Matt's, but in a much more visual way.

Why? I thought it was a useful, and amusing insight into the ridiculous nature of social networking, and ties in with a lot of stuff that has been talked about on HN (eg Matt Maroon's posts, and paul's)

what are the obvious reasons? Web app is amazingly non specific.

you will get more help if you are more open.