Anyone who believes startup outcomes are mostly luck doesn’t have what it takes to be a successful founder—you need to have the belief that you can shape the ou

Anyone who believes startup outcomes are mostly luck doesn’t have what it takes to be a successful founder—you need to have the belief that you can shape the outcome. The idea that we reduce outcomes to two buckets, success and failure and then flip a coin is reductive and belies the decisions and effort that lead every human endeavor to its own unique outcome. Keep in mind corporate projects fail all the time too, we just don’t talk in these terms because people’s salaries and jobs aren’t on the line. Of course luck matters tremendously in terms of riding a series of waves to make a billion dollar company, but it was paved with hard and deliberate work every step of the way. The founders could have reacted and changed direction completely at any stage along the way, therefore these fixed percentage figures are meaningless. How hard did each of those founders work? How many pivots? What type of businesses? What skill sets did they bring? And to your last point, who is saying it’s wrong for employees to get more stake? Of course it’s not wrong, but as an employee you have to negotiate that. People can’t just magically get what they feel they deserve because it would add up to way over 100%. Remember, the company exists because of the founder, doesn’t matter how much you think you contribute, because at the end of the day the company does not exist without them. If you can convince them to give you more then you should, and if you can’t you are free to start your own company. I do not see what is so unfair about this situation and I say that as instrumental #1 employee who got less than 1% for a 9-year effort building a moderately successful company. You don’t get what you deserve in life, you get what you negotiate.