>You make the false assumption that you can't pay well your employees if you push them hard, as if it was an either/or. You can pay well your employees or not.

>You make the false assumption that you can't pay well your employees if you push them hard, as if it was an either/or. You can pay well your employees or not. You can push your employees and ask them to do more than average or not. That wasn't an assumption, that was a suggestion that both of these could exist in different permutations. The fact that they there is tension between these two methods doesn't mean they're a binary and mutually exclusive, and that's not how I read GPs comment. You didn't actually address the point either, which was the notion of doubling down and investing in yourselves as a company instead of hedging with a 401k. It is interesting how you interpret this idea for your own company. >I do find that doing this while also investing gigantic sums on something that has nothing to do with your core business is a bit unsavory. I see this as not very relevant to the previous points so I address it separately. Effectively once your company's revenue and value moves beyond 7 digits, I would argue that financial paradigms have everything to do with your business regardless of what it is.