Founder's objective is not to delay executing all ideas - web firm partnerships will bring higher execution success probability. Each idea will be executed by 3 different web firms through equity partnerships. Investors can invest seperately in the 3 diff corp. Founder will create holding firm to consolidate his shares from the 3 corp. What's wrong w/ this scenario? Help.
There is nothing more harmful to a good idea than other ideas. By that I mean, the inability to decide which idea is worth pursuing over others, causes each idea to suffer when trying to distribute resources in support of more than one concept at a time.
Your question presumes that the most important aspect of launching an online business is to have a site built. That's only where the hardest work begins. In order to achieve any traction whatsoever, a daily focus is required to optimize a site's messaging and conversions, optimize customer acquisition tactics, and iterate based on customer feedback.
The idea that a single founder can achieve by having to do what is a full day's work for one site multiplied across 3 different sites is fraught with problems.
You may wish to check my recent answers as I answered a question earlier this week about how investors perceive multi-product companies and their founders. The bottom-line being the idea that this is going to produce a more attractive outcome to investors is also one that has proven time and again to result in failure.
Happy to talk all this through in a call if you'd like to dive deeper.