3 ms·
Regarding: "I started working n months before my co-founder" A really good way to handle this is with vesting, which is something every company should have.
by jdoliner 11y ago
Regarding: "I started working n months before my co-founder"
A really good way to handle this is with vesting, which is something every company should have. Normally stock vests as you spend more time at the company, in my opinion it's totally fair for cofounders to have equal stock allocations but if one founder was working for 6 months before the other joined they should be 6 months ahead on their vesting.
- brudgers 11y agoMy concern is that an accelerated vesting schedule for one founder versus the other only matters in one particular case and that case is a bad one: the founder with accelerated equity decides to cease working and become a passive owner. In any other circumstance, the "earlier" founder and the "later" founder have aligned interests in regard to equity independent of vesting schedule. An "earlier" founder insistent on more aggressive vesting may be symptomatic of an underlying poor relationship. That's not to say that there couldn't be circumstances in which two founders naturally have different vesting schedules, e.g. the "earlier" founder incorporated the final entity prior to the "later" founder's involvement. But from a formal standpoint, if both founders are there the day of incorporation, then that's where the clock starts.