4 ms·

It definitely is more risk. However when I evaluate startups I'm comparing them against other jobs. Stable income it may be but the runway is short, and depend

It definitely is more risk. However when I evaluate startups I'm comparing them against other jobs. Stable income it may be but the runway is short, and depending on the founders it may or not be well communicated. So it is much less stable than a job in a big company. So to me I want a good multiplier. Many of the payoffs I've seen for startups that did well for early employees put earnings on par with what I've done at a large company without the startup risk. And that's for the ones that do very well which is a low chance. So in the end I personally would get a lot more stress and a lot less income to usually being equal in a great case. So generally it doesn't seem that worth the risk, low control, and probably low payoff. I'd actually be more likely to join a startup in some years when I'm financially at a retirement or FIRE point. But then it's like, working for a founder on their idea, and maybe the pressure to hold out for 5-10 years there for the actual payout. Just my mental space around it.

fastball 5y ago
Really depends on the job market though. If the startup goes belly up but you were making good money in the interim and you can quickly find a new job, it's not much risk. A founder who eats in to savings and goes unpaid for two years is on an entirely different level of risk profile. But yes, if your primary concern is job security, in general you should not be working for a startup, regardless of how many points you get.
- grogenaut 5y ago
  I'm not arguing that it isn't more risky for the founder. I'm saying that the payoff potential that remains esp when you look at the pool of startups, is almost never worth it compared to a job at a bigco, even at the top end. Eg this is me explaining why I wouldn't work at a startup as I shoulder more risk and very very low chance at a payoff better than I could get at a bigco, and worse case you spend 5 more years at the big co and you can be getting into founder level payoffs. At that point why even take a risk if there isn't a reward if you are a strong engineer. The only thing that makes sense to me is to be a founder, or go work a stable high paying job if you're able to. This pay structure greatly limits access to very experienced employees for a startup.
  - fastball 5y ago
    I think the key thing missing from your analysis is that some (most?) people aren't optimizing their careers for minimal risk and maximal pay. There are a great many other factors at play.
    - grogenaut 5y ago
      I didn't say there wernt, this is a message about my personal pov written while on the phone on the can, not a treatise or full data based coverage of all workers.

fastball 5y ago

Really depends on the job market though. If the startup goes belly up but you were making good money in the interim and you can quickly find a new job, it's not much risk. A founder who eats in to savings and goes unpaid for two years is on an entirely different level of risk profile. But yes, if your primary concern is job security, in general you should not be working for a startup, regardless of how many points you get.

grogenaut 5y ago
I'm not arguing that it isn't more risky for the founder. I'm saying that the payoff potential that remains esp when you look at the pool of startups, is almost never worth it compared to a job at a bigco, even at the top end. Eg this is me explaining why I wouldn't work at a startup as I shoulder more risk and very very low chance at a payoff better than I could get at a bigco, and worse case you spend 5 more years at the big co and you can be getting into founder level payoffs. At that point why even take a risk if there isn't a reward if you are a strong engineer. The only thing that makes sense to me is to be a founder, or go work a stable high paying job if you're able to. This pay structure greatly limits access to very experienced employees for a startup.
- fastball 5y ago
  I think the key thing missing from your analysis is that some (most?) people aren't optimizing their careers for minimal risk and maximal pay. There are a great many other factors at play.
  - grogenaut 5y ago
    I didn't say there wernt, this is a message about my personal pov written while on the phone on the can, not a treatise or full data based coverage of all workers.