3 ms·

Use this framework to split the equity pie. http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/fd0n/35%20Founders%27%20Pie%20Calculator.htm http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/fd0n/35%2

Use this framework to split the equity pie. http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/fd0n/35%20Founders%27%20Pie%20Calculator.htm http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/fd0n/35%20Founders%27%20Pie%2... Obviously, your initial code base has some value to it. The above framework nicely value the past/future contribution of each party to remove much ambiguity.

subpixel 18y ago
The best part of that document is the line "the founders who join the company full time and are committed to making it a success are much more valuable than founders who are going to sit on the sideline and be cheerleaders." That said, if the three of you are equally committed, you should probably be equal owners, based on the information you've shared. If I was the guy turning your idea into gold and you held significantly more equity than me just because you built a prototype, that fact would bubble up and bother me exactly when you don't want it to - when things get tough.
- ltbarcly 18y ago
  I agree. Also, you can't patent or trademark just an idea. So just wait out the year or whatever on your NDA and make the company yourself. Unless the people who want you to build the prototype have millions of dollars in funding, they need you much more than you need them. It is nearly impossible for a nontechnical person to manage to get a web application out the door without huge piles of money. Someone with the ability to build the site can do it for whatever time it takes them to do the actual work. Really, any nontechnical 'partner' had better be bringing in leads, selling ads, or otherwise causing cash to come in, or they are basically dead weight (and they'll have lots of little changes they want made to the site, aka the what color to paint the shed principle). Having spent hours and hours programming, while the 'partner' does basically nothing, thinking long and hard about usability and how things should flow, and then having a 'partner' look at the site for 30 seconds and start listing off changes that need to be made is not tolerable.
savrajsingh 18y ago
That's actually a pretty cool document... Thanks for sharing.

subpixel 18y ago

The best part of that document is the line "the founders who join the company full time and are committed to making it a success are much more valuable than founders who are going to sit on the sideline and be cheerleaders." That said, if the three of you are equally committed, you should probably be equal owners, based on the information you've shared. If I was the guy turning your idea into gold and you held significantly more equity than me just because you built a prototype, that fact would bubble up and bother me exactly when you don't want it to - when things get tough.

ltbarcly 18y ago
I agree. Also, you can't patent or trademark just an idea. So just wait out the year or whatever on your NDA and make the company yourself. Unless the people who want you to build the prototype have millions of dollars in funding, they need you much more than you need them. It is nearly impossible for a nontechnical person to manage to get a web application out the door without huge piles of money. Someone with the ability to build the site can do it for whatever time it takes them to do the actual work. Really, any nontechnical 'partner' had better be bringing in leads, selling ads, or otherwise causing cash to come in, or they are basically dead weight (and they'll have lots of little changes they want made to the site, aka the what color to paint the shed principle). Having spent hours and hours programming, while the 'partner' does basically nothing, thinking long and hard about usability and how things should flow, and then having a 'partner' look at the site for 30 seconds and start listing off changes that need to be made is not tolerable.

savrajsingh 18y ago

That's actually a pretty cool document... Thanks for sharing.