4 ms·
> I would never invest in a company that: > It’s just starting to grow in its market Then you should not work at one. Genuinely. The only way comp makes sense
by kevinmchugh 5y ago
> I would never invest in a company that:
> It’s just starting to grow in its market
Then you should not work at one. Genuinely. The only way comp makes sense at a startup is if you think the equity will end up valuable. Most people who believe this will be wrong, so you have to really believe that you're the exception. If you don't, it makes a lot more sense to work somewhere that's already found product-market fit. Your labor is an investment that's very difficult to diversify.
> Treats its employees the way GitLab treated me
This is tough, but I know people who exercised shares after being fired, and then saw those shares become valuable. How do you decide that you being fired doesn't signify the company having lost its way? How do you hold the idea that you were fired and it's bullshit at some level, but the company will still do well and you can make money? I don't know, it's hard. You should think very hard about this, if you're in this position.
- kevin_thibedeau 5y agoWhen a startup has $500M in runway and the devs are taking in more than a median salary why must equity stakes be a requirement?
- Ancapistani 5y ago"Salary" is not "total compensation". IMO, part of working for a startup is accepting the risk/instability. Another part is taking on responsibility at a much faster rate than you otherwise would. That's typically compensated via equity.
- kevin_thibedeau 5y agoHow is a startup with 5 years of runway riskier than a non-startup with $100M revenue? The only difference is that the money comes from sugar daddies rather than paying customers. In the olden days working for a startup entailed below market pay and equity was the reward for slogging it out.