I support the fi.co/fast, but I personally think it's a bit too in favor of the startup, and real world advisory agreements may require much less effort from th

I support the fi.co/fast, but I personally think it's a bit too in favor of the startup, and real world advisory agreements may require much less effort from the advisor. For example the 1% is at idea stage and requires 20h/mo = avg 1h/day, which is an insane amount. It's more realistic to have a consistent 30min call/mo, and maybe a few extra hours when the advisor is really needed, for example if you're brainstorming an idea, or executing on a launch. And maybe it's worth giving them a 0.5% even for this apparently small amount of time. That's also more realistic for you, because you want to be prepared to talk to your advisors, and having too many interactions is just too distracting. Vesting, I've seen it many time as 2y no cliff vs the classical 4y + 1y cliff for employees/founders. If you know the advisor already and she already provided value, you have no reason to require a cliff. Again, I support the fi.co/fast, and I'm not saying to not go with that as a start, mine are just negotiation points to close a good advisor. Finding good advisors is hard, they might have little time, and they may refuse the engagement if it seems too heavy from the get go.