> If a founder leaves stockholders behind to take a lucrative side deal, they’re not acting ethically. I’ve mostly taken this position in the past, before becom

> If a founder leaves stockholders behind to take a lucrative side deal, they’re not acting ethically. I’ve mostly taken this position in the past, before becoming a VC. As if VCs are acting "ethically". I have seen many VC cases (and been involved with a few) and be assured, VCs are not "ethical" or think founders AT ALL. All they think about is their money. If they could exchange founders future for a fat pile of cash, they will do it. If the VCs are minority owners (as it seems in case like this), they can just accept what is decided. This is also the case with founders when VCs have majority. They will always do what they want (what's best for their money) without thinking founders best interest or "ethics" of their actions.