Seems pretty misleading to call these one-person startups. Maybe PlentyOfFish should qualify because it was run by one person for years with significant revenues and profits, and there may be a good case for DuckDuckGo.
I can't say with absolute certainty about all the rest but many were solo founders who quickly attracted a team.
Shel Kaphan, Amazon's first employee, should arguably be seen as a cofounder of sorts:
Although he's not officially considered a co-founder, he and Bezos were discussing the company even before it was incorporated, and Bezos once referred to him as "the most important person ever in the history of Amazon.com."
I understand the article's criteria for "one person" but I think it's worth it to add some nuance to that list...
Amazon was "one person" as in boundaries defined by legal ownership of a business entity, but it was really kicked off by hiring Shel Kaphan to engineer their first web store. If Jeff Bezos was more inclusive, and/or Shel Kaphan was more business-savvy, he arguably might have been a co-founder instead of a forgotten employee (albeit a wealthy ex-employee.)
If we rule out situations like amazon, and listed only companies that were truly "built" by one person until it reached critical mass, that would be a much more interesting list.
I'd be really curious to see that too, especially if it remained one person until revenue hit some kind of critical mass. One person builds, ships, markets, ...
It's certainly possible but obviously very hard for many reasons.
One-person startup is doable - moderate SaaS app that generates decent revenue. However, infographics like this are obviously saying that startup=beeeeellleeeon dollar companies
I think it's possible. How many founders does a typical start-up have? I guess I don't see a huge difference from one to two founders. I never was a venture capital guy until recently, but I think it's pretty important to success. Having some marketing money as well as the money to hire a few guys to help out early makes a huge difference.
My night project, PaperBox (gopaperbox.com), started with just two guys doing it a combined 20 hours per week or so. Over the course of 6 months or so, we have released several updates and grown substantially. I do wonder what we could be if we could commit to it full time and have any sort of a marketing budget.
Im not a founder so my knowledge is somewhat limited, but from what I see around me most of the known or more 'successful' startups tend to have at least 2 founders. There must be some reason/correlation behind that right ?
its exactly the same. I bet there was someone in 1996 who was saying "yeah, you could start a tech company alone in 1985, but today... its too crowded, I bet it can't be done anymore". It can always be done.
I'll accept that point but I still don't think its the same. My thinking is that these companies pretty much grew with the internet, which played a pretty big role in their success and I just don't see the internet growing in that same fashion today.
That said, the way we use the internet today is changing which is why I don't think its exactly impossible but would question how difficult it would be in comparison to 20years ago.
I wish I had one so I could show it to the VCs who we're closing a round with. They insist I get a co-founder for the business side (I'm a techie), with lot's of contacts. I said I prefer to hire a biz person instead, but they say we can't afford, at this stage, to spend our money on a top-level exec. So it we'll be better if we just find one that's willing to become a co-founder. I replied to them a "co-founder" is much more than an exec with lots of equity and a below-market wage. Years ago it would have been great to have a business co-founder so I could focus more on product. But not after 4 years, with a team of 11 and a profitable enterprise software business. But I don't know if that's common or not. Is it? I feel hiring a co-founder (sic) is not a formula for success.
I'm sort of in the market for a co-founder, someone with a strong marketing, sales, and biz-dev background most likely.
I'm the nerd looking for the suit, not the other way around, though I do have some business experience myself. I at least know which way is up in the biz domain. :)
But if I don't find such a person who really looks like a great fit (both skills and personality/vision compatibility), I will go it alone. I consider the sole founder path superior to a bad or hasty fit for a co-founder. I do have a partnership and some advisor relationships in the works, so I'm not totally alone. If I raise I'll also have investors to threaten to demote me if the goals aren't m^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H I mean contribute valuable insight.
Techmeme only has 10,000 recurring readers? I don't believe that for a second. I loaded the "source" for this info - http://www.businessinsider.com/techmeme-growth-2014-3 - and the only place 10,000 recurring readers is mentioned is in a hypothetical example of how stats can be inflated by content sites, not actual stats for Techmeme.
I am the founder and sole operator of PubExchange, a platform that helps publishers manage their link exchanges. It is currently powering billions of links per month.
Why should the author try to fulfill some sort of gender-quota? The purpose of the article is clearly to collate the top 10 single-founder startups, rather than the top 5 male and top 5 female single-founder startups, etc.
Not sure I'd call it a "tech" startup, but it definitely counts as a startup and a successful one. Apologies to #2 if I'm wrong about it being sole founder. I'd say it's more successful than some of the revenue-free entries on this list.
This is an excellent question. There are plenty of tech companies which happen to have been founded by one woman. Why not include some? I suspect this wasn't a deliberate oversight by the author, but it does illustrate the benefit of having an editor or some other feedback before clicking Publish.
Disappointed there's no women on the list. Even more disappointed that fully 7 of the top 10 have no indication of revenue.
Remember: if there's no revenue, it's not a business. It's a hobby.
EDIT: To clarify, (I noted someone else pointing out it's very US-centric, which is ANOTHER problem) I have serious doubts it's really the top 10 in the world. More likely the top 10 this author has heard of.
I can't say with absolute certainty about all the rest but many were solo founders who quickly attracted a team.