To be fair, at an extremely early-stage startup, no one really knows who will eventually fill the executive roles. There is a good chance that the founding "CEO

To be fair, at an extremely early-stage startup, no one really knows who will eventually fill the executive roles. There is a good chance that the founding "CEO" will no longer serve in the CEO role a few years down the line (particularly if the company has taken a significant VC infusion). It is relatively difficult to know how much "contribution" each team member will make over the long-term. Therefore, I would say that your argument makes little sense. The reason why the founder gets more than developer #1 is that the founder takes on the risk of starting the company, while employee #1 is making a salary of some sort (if not, he should be considered a founder and take a significant equity stake).