3 ms·

> Have you interviewed in many startups? "Sober view" is not what you'd get from a founder hard-selling you on any role. Try "wildly optimistic, unrealistically

> Have you interviewed in many startups? "Sober view" is not what you'd get from a founder hard-selling you on any role. Try "wildly optimistic, unrealistically so". Don't join those companies. I've spent over a decade in the startup industry, I've interviewed at a ton of startups. Most startups are not worth working at. > Eh. Unless it's a late-stage startups (which is not the typical scenario), it's very hard to know what will happen. You can model some events, but the key question remains unanswered: how successful is this going to be? Right, that's exactly what I said...in the case that it's not successful it's not like anyone is getting rich, so in that case it's not like employees have been "screwed out" of options. In reference to Skype: they did absolutely poison the talent pool look at you remembering and posting this article. Are you or anyone reading this thread ever going to consider working for Skype? Why else would TechCrunch cover it? Not only that, the agreement that Skype offered did not change, so a bunch of people signed a shitty agreement and are then upset that it didn't work out well. This is not the rug being pulled out from underneath engineers, this is engineers not understanding what they are signing. You're right that most startup options are worthless, but not all are, and that doesn't mean you can't reason about which are worthless and which are not.

dunpeal 8y ago
> Most startups are not worth working at. I agree completely, which is why I stopped working at startups myself. The question was about how startups are in general, so we must acknowledge that wildly optimistic equity value expectations are the norm. "Just don't work at these places" isn't viable advice when the vast majority of startups are like this. Like it or not, most people open to working for a startup will end up working for a startup like this, where the founder tells all candidates their 0.0001% is going to be worth millions because the startup is taking over a $300bn industry. > Right, that's exactly what I said...in the case that it's not successful it's not like anyone is getting rich, so in that case it's not like employees have been "screwed out" of options. Sure, but modelling liquidity events and such is totally worthless if the most important number isn't known. Especially when that most important number dominates the others. How many funding rounds is the startup going to have? Totally depends on its revenue. Same for dilution, and how likely they are to look for ways to screw regular shareholders over. > In reference to Skype: they did absolutely poison the talent pool look at you remembering and posting this article. So one person in a huge thread is evidence Skype paid dearly for that massive shit show? Let's get real. The typical fresh graduate hasn't even heard of the Skype IPO. Skype is now part of MS. Even hearing of this awful story, would anyone refrain from joining MS because of it? I doubt. > You're right that most startup options are worthless, but not all are, and that doesn't mean you can't reason about which are worthless and which are not. This reply was for someone who is the average financially-non-savvy startup employee. It's not for me, maybe also not for you. If I was looking to work for a startup again, I'd know what to look for, and what to avoid.
- wdewind 8y ago
  > The question was about how startups are in general, so we must acknowledge that wildly optimistic equity value expectations are the norm. Isn't this true about life in general? Even when you go interview at bigco they are lying to you about your position and how great the work/life balance is etc. It's weird to me that HN expects employers to be their personal lawyers, explaining incentives to them when it comes to options. The idea that there are tons of employers out there violating legal agreements over options is nonsense and its what is implied in a lot of these threads. People need to learn about options, like people need to learn about everything in their career to get good at their jobs. It's not a mystical art, people are just greedy and read the FB story and expect to show up and make a billion dollars their first go around so they don't bother to read or understand the agreements. I certainly was like that, got burned, and then wised up. FWIW I'd actually still considering joining Skype today I'd just read the agreement before I did so. I would expect them to stick to their agreements, as they have a track record of doing in the past. As I said, it's bizarre to me that the expectation is that people signing these agreements aren't responsible for understanding them.
  - dunpeal 8y ago
    > Isn't this true about life in general? Even when you go interview at bigco they are lying to you about your position and how great the work/life balance is etc. No, it's not. Because if they tell you their work-life balance is great, and you join and realize everyone works 12 hour days, then they have a disgruntled employee who's probably going to leave ASAP. That deception is affecting your life right now, probably in ways that threaten your life or lifestyle, things you counted on. Also, you're not going to hear about the workplace only from "the employer". You're going to get input from a bunch of employees like yourself. They're not going to orchestrate a lie, typically. Definitely not a lie about something you're likely to discover immediately. "Hey guys, how was your weekend? Oh, and thanks for totally lying about the great work life balance... You totally got me, haha... My kids don't even remember me anymore, hilarious!!" Compare that to options, which worth is hypothetical and up for debate. None of your fellow employees know more than what the founders told them. It's some glowing future promise that will only be broken a few years down the road... When they typically won't need you anymore... That's what the threads here are about, by the way. I don't see a ton of people complaining their hyped-up worthless equity was illegal. It's just that all these people assumed it would be worth a lot, because that's what they were told, and ended up with nothing. All these bubbles take years to burst, and then folks find out after 4-5 years that their equity is worth nothing, so they come to complain here in HN threads.

dunpeal 8y ago

> Most startups are not worth working at. I agree completely, which is why I stopped working at startups myself. The question was about how startups are in general, so we must acknowledge that wildly optimistic equity value expectations are the norm. "Just don't work at these places" isn't viable advice when the vast majority of startups are like this. Like it or not, most people open to working for a startup will end up working for a startup like this, where the founder tells all candidates their 0.0001% is going to be worth millions because the startup is taking over a $300bn industry. > Right, that's exactly what I said...in the case that it's not successful it's not like anyone is getting rich, so in that case it's not like employees have been "screwed out" of options. Sure, but modelling liquidity events and such is totally worthless if the most important number isn't known. Especially when that most important number dominates the others. How many funding rounds is the startup going to have? Totally depends on its revenue. Same for dilution, and how likely they are to look for ways to screw regular shareholders over. > In reference to Skype: they did absolutely poison the talent pool look at you remembering and posting this article. So one person in a huge thread is evidence Skype paid dearly for that massive shit show? Let's get real. The typical fresh graduate hasn't even heard of the Skype IPO. Skype is now part of MS. Even hearing of this awful story, would anyone refrain from joining MS because of it? I doubt. > You're right that most startup options are worthless, but not all are, and that doesn't mean you can't reason about which are worthless and which are not. This reply was for someone who is the average financially-non-savvy startup employee. It's not for me, maybe also not for you. If I was looking to work for a startup again, I'd know what to look for, and what to avoid.

wdewind 8y ago
> The question was about how startups are in general, so we must acknowledge that wildly optimistic equity value expectations are the norm. Isn't this true about life in general? Even when you go interview at bigco they are lying to you about your position and how great the work/life balance is etc. It's weird to me that HN expects employers to be their personal lawyers, explaining incentives to them when it comes to options. The idea that there are tons of employers out there violating legal agreements over options is nonsense and its what is implied in a lot of these threads. People need to learn about options, like people need to learn about everything in their career to get good at their jobs. It's not a mystical art, people are just greedy and read the FB story and expect to show up and make a billion dollars their first go around so they don't bother to read or understand the agreements. I certainly was like that, got burned, and then wised up. FWIW I'd actually still considering joining Skype today I'd just read the agreement before I did so. I would expect them to stick to their agreements, as they have a track record of doing in the past. As I said, it's bizarre to me that the expectation is that people signing these agreements aren't responsible for understanding them.
- dunpeal 8y ago
  > Isn't this true about life in general? Even when you go interview at bigco they are lying to you about your position and how great the work/life balance is etc. No, it's not. Because if they tell you their work-life balance is great, and you join and realize everyone works 12 hour days, then they have a disgruntled employee who's probably going to leave ASAP. That deception is affecting your life right now, probably in ways that threaten your life or lifestyle, things you counted on. Also, you're not going to hear about the workplace only from "the employer". You're going to get input from a bunch of employees like yourself. They're not going to orchestrate a lie, typically. Definitely not a lie about something you're likely to discover immediately. "Hey guys, how was your weekend? Oh, and thanks for totally lying about the great work life balance... You totally got me, haha... My kids don't even remember me anymore, hilarious!!" Compare that to options, which worth is hypothetical and up for debate. None of your fellow employees know more than what the founders told them. It's some glowing future promise that will only be broken a few years down the road... When they typically won't need you anymore... That's what the threads here are about, by the way. I don't see a ton of people complaining their hyped-up worthless equity was illegal. It's just that all these people assumed it would be worth a lot, because that's what they were told, and ended up with nothing. All these bubbles take years to burst, and then folks find out after 4-5 years that their equity is worth nothing, so they come to complain here in HN threads.