Options have an expected value (EV) that isn't too hard to calculate approximately. They also have a relatively high variance. But it's trivially easy to prove

Options have an expected value (EV) that isn't too hard to calculate approximately. They also have a relatively high variance. But it's trivially easy to prove they're not worthless, even if some become so when the company fails. I've personally had one "hit" and a few misses. Whether to accept options instead of salary is an individual choice that depends entirely on their risk profile and the terms...how much salary are you forgoing, how much equity are you getting, how likely do you believe a liquidity event is. If you could sit at a roulette table that paid 40-1 when you hit a number, would you play? That's a +EV bet despite the fact that 32/33 times that bet will lose. If you had infinite funds and infinite bets, you'd be a fool not to play. But if you're betting you last dollar, you're probably going hungry that night since you'll be losing 32 times as often as you win. And that same bet at the traditional 32-1 is a loser no matter how much money you have. The terms of the bet and the individual's circumstances dictate whether to play. Options are the same, you just need to be familiar enough with the whole situation to judge the terms you're getting. Many startups are very good at selling the upside and underselling the risk, so people give away salary at -EV terms. But that doesn't mean that equity is worthless.