3 ms·
That rests on the perverse assumption that founders are the most talented and deserving individuals in the universe, and everyone one else should be happy to un
by Veen 6y ago
That rests on the perverse assumption that founders are the most talented and deserving individuals in the universe, and everyone one else should be happy to uncomplainingly serve the interests of these fabulous ubermensch.
To say that’s a naive and inaccurate view of the world would be an understatement.
- nxmnxm99 6y agoOr, you know, negotiate higher equity and stop bitching and moralizing when your payout isn’t high enough.
- marcinzm 6y agoSo one is supposed to negotiate for higher equity but at the same time those who have gone through it aren't supposed to discuss their experience and payout? I suspect you're also one of those people who says employees should just have negotiated better salaries but also fires them for discussing salaries.
- hn_throwaway_99 6y ago> Or, you know, negotiate higher equity and stop bitching and moralizing when your payout isn’t high enough. Seriously, what is your point here, besides acting like a jerk? I mean, I totally agree with you, but that's why I think this thread is important. It should be a lesson to potential startup employees about how extremely lopsided the risk/return considerations are, that most equity deals are complete shit at startups, and that you should usually demand more equity if you have any negotiating power. Indeed, the purpose of threads like this should be to convince startup employees as a whole that they're getting screwed on equity so they should demand more.
- goatherders 6y agoI didn't think it was a jerk comment at all. Your point is 100% right though. Early startup employees rarely understand the risk/reward. Surely none of the 10 employees at a 7 year old software company doing 1.6M a year thought they were on a rocketship.
- nxmnxm99 6y agoThis thread has nothing to do with a level headed discussion on the "fairness" of equity (which doesn't even make sense). I was responding to a comment calling Josh a dick for finally getting paid for a company he built that adds value to thousands of customer's lives, instead of giving it to highly replaceable early engineers. Average software engineer gets compensated with 6 figure income for 7 years leading to a $70k cash payout. What a jerk that Josh is. Rise, proletariat, rise.
- tehwebguy 6y agoNo, it doesn’t. It simply means if nobody founds it there is no company in the first place. Whoever wants to do the first 3-6 months (or 3-6 years) without a paycheck while figuring out the problem, solution and funding gets to be the founder. If employees were lowballed underpaid, screwed out of vested shares etc that’s different but of course the person that decides to make the company owns most of it and gets the biggest payout when it sells.
- goatherders 6y agoNo, it says that those that take the biggest risks get the biggest outcomes. Being an early employee of a startup doesn't give you the "right" to a big payout any more than being an founder of a startup gives you a right to inexpensive labor.
- nxmnxm99 6y agoNo, it rests on the realistic assumption that there are a million engineers you can hire to be "early employees", and only a handful of Josh Porters with the talent to build something great and the risk tolerance to execute on it. The market doesn't care about your fragile ego or low self-esteem.