Proposed hypothesis
Domain-expert founders seeking a venture partnership
A founder with deep industry knowledge and a validated problem, but no engineering team.
Who we serve here · Proposed hypothesis
Who is involved, and what each person receives at the end.
A founder with deep industry knowledge and a validated problem, but no engineering team.
Process owner
Named workflow decision owner
Needs: Define scope, permitted work and acceptance.
Doubt: Responsibility becoming unclear between people.
Proposed deliverables · agreed in scope
- • Proposed acceptance, approval and handover responsibilities as agreed
User
Founder
Needs: A technical partner who builds and runs the platform.
Doubt: Giving equity to someone who leaves.
Proposed deliverables · agreed in scope
- • A first release with scope and schedule agreed
- • Any equity, fee or vesting terms agreed separately
Buyer
Co-investors
Needs: Confidence the build is real and owned.
Doubt: Outsourced code with no owner.
Proposed deliverables · agreed in scope
- • Architecture documentation and repository terms agreed before setup
Responsibilities, not a promised roster: economic buyer, process owner, user, technical approver and operator may overlap. Explore the Finance illustrative example →·MSP illustrative example →.
Our promise
If there is mutual fit, we agree equity or fee terms, delivery scope and operating responsibilities before work
Holds when
- • Criteria on the partnership page are met
- • Terms are signed before work starts
Limits — what we don't promise
- • Acceptance and capacity are not guaranteed
- • No guarantee of funding or revenue
Before
Domain insight with no way to build it.
After
A proposed first release and technical partnership under separately agreed terms
What it takes from you
Founder full-time on domain, customers and sales.
Constraints we respect
Selective; availability and terms require agreement.
The experience
From first conversation to handover.
01
Application
Criteria check and founder conversation.
02
Terms
Equity, vesting and exit agreed in writing.
03
First release
Scope, access and acceptance gates determine timing.
Evidence, labelled honestly
- Founder background and current in-house development directionsContext
- Partnership outcomes under this programmeUnknown
Context = portfolio direction, not operational acceptance · Proposed = our method, not yet proven for this audience · Unknown = we won't claim it yet.
Access we ask for — and how you take it back
- • Shared company accounts owned by the venture
Account and repository ownership, access and exit terms are agreed before setup.
Initial inquiry: non-sensitive summary only. Later assessment: authorised redacted samples or read-only access. Sandbox and production write access require separate approval, minimisation, access expiry and retention agreement.
Exit terms define handover of code, accounts and docs.
Something useful to pass along
A build-status summary for co-investors.
Useful to: Angels and early investors.. Shared only if you choose to.
Why you'd come back: Ongoing operation and roadmap as a partner.
What we watch for harm: Founder dependence on us for routine changes.
Not a fit: No domain validation yet · Founder not committed full-time
Next step
Tell us which of these people you are.
Request an assessment of fit and proposed next steps; timing, scope and follow-up require confirmation.