I will be reposting or updating some posts I've made over the years.
This topic is one that tends to come back once in a while.
As an investor, I don't want Co-CEOs.
Some folks love the idea, and it can work in some instances.
But what I want, is to know who to shoot first. Whose head is on the chopping block, and who is the ONE person I need to deal with if I want to know something will get done. If you can't respond and have your team point to the same person, then there's an issue brewing that I don't want to have to unwind. If I know there's going to be a problem after the investment, why should I make the investment beforehand?
Don't divide the pie up evenly. Everyone is equal, but at least make one person more equal that others. Give the head of the team one more share than everyone else. Something that can break ties, and make it easier for both the investors and the team to understand.