3 ms·

The startup system is pretty rigged against accidentally making anyone rich who is a mere employee. That money is for the investors, not the working class. Th

The startup system is pretty rigged against accidentally making anyone rich who is a mere employee. That money is for the investors, not the working class. The days of the office assistant making millions on stock are long gone. There's options with huge tax implications, long vesting periods, the investors get preferred stock, they get guaranteed multiples, if there's a down round there's a carve-out that you won't be part of. Not only do the investors have priority shares over employees, each investor can negotiate a guaranteed multiple. For example if they put in 100 million for 10% ownership but also had a 5X multiple guarantee and a sale price of 1 billion then the 500 million they walk away with ends up being 50% of the sale price. That part of the agreement isn't made public as far as I know.

neilv 3y ago
If I want to found a VC-funded startup for which a successful exit is much more fair to the employees, how do I do that? Will the investors insist that it all come out of the founders' percentage of the pie, or can I argue that the better-incentived employees mean a bigger and more likely pie, so VC terms shoudl be less grabby? Will VCs react negatively to "being soft on" employees, even if it all comes out of founders' slice? Do early employees get ISOs, other options, RSUs, or something else?
- killingtime74 3y ago
  First find a VC fund that agrees with you
- cj 3y ago
  > how do I do that? The only good answer to this is 1) don't raise more VC money than you really need, and 2) don’t raise money at a valuation way above what your company is actually worth. The problem in the scenario here is that they sold for below the valuation of their last funding round, and the size of their last funding round was ginormous. When you raise hundreds of millions at a $1.5b valuation, you’re expected to sell above $1.5b at some point in the future. Any less and you didn’t live up to the opportunity that you pitched investors (and the financial outcomes for everyone deteriorates when you sell for way less than your valuation).
  - neilv 3y ago
    Can I still attract VC, if I'm arguing for more modest valuations than competing lottery-ticket startups are? Or do I have to look like much more a traditional fundamentals investment, than a semirandom lottery ticket (or growth scam to exit)?
    - CitrusFruits 3y ago
      Not an expert here, but I have worked at a couple startups. The answer I would give is probably not: VCs basically work on a premise like this: 1 in 25 investments will return 100x, 5 in 25 will make they're money back, and the rest are just a wash. The only way the make money is if the company is mega successful, so they're not really interested if that's not a possibility. That being said, not every person at a VC is going to be super greedy or anything like that, it's just the nature of the business model for venture capital.
- pixelmonkey 3y ago
  Pragmatically, read "Venture Deals" and "Founder vs Investor" before you start your company. Then hire a reputable law firm and imagine you're an employee rather than a founder, and setup the initial structure in an employee friendly way. When raising your first round, have some non-negotiables that carry the structure forward. You can DM me on Twitter/X if you want more specifics based on my experience. Successful startup companies can and should compensate employees well with both cash and stock. It's only incompetence and greed that endangers this outcome. VC expectations are a red herring, only bad VCs are so short-sighted as to deprive a founder of one of the major tools of team-building (truly valuable company equity). As a founder, there are forces you have to fight against from first principles using your moral compass via a thoughtful fundraising strategy, but it can be done.
- junofan 3y ago
  Let your lawyers deal with it.
- gangstead 3y ago
  I don't think VC money cares whether you are soft on the employees. They are there to buy as big a slice of a small pie before it gets big. Anything you keep for yourself or give to your employees is pie that could be theirs. If they show up and you've already promised half the pie away they'll pay less for what's left, or you won't be one of 100 slices in their pie portfolio. Maybe you can convince them the motivated employees will lead to more growth, but it's not the type of thing they are normally swayed by. I think the end result is that it's probably not possible to pay employees with meaningful equity anymore so you'll have to go back to paying them the old fashioned way with money. I know I'm no longer willing to take RSU lotto tickets and a pay cut to work at a startup.

neilv 3y ago

If I want to found a VC-funded startup for which a successful exit is much more fair to the employees, how do I do that? Will the investors insist that it all come out of the founders' percentage of the pie, or can I argue that the better-incentived employees mean a bigger and more likely pie, so VC terms shoudl be less grabby? Will VCs react negatively to "being soft on" employees, even if it all comes out of founders' slice? Do early employees get ISOs, other options, RSUs, or something else?

killingtime74 3y ago
First find a VC fund that agrees with you
cj 3y ago
> how do I do that? The only good answer to this is 1) don't raise more VC money than you really need, and 2) don’t raise money at a valuation way above what your company is actually worth. The problem in the scenario here is that they sold for below the valuation of their last funding round, and the size of their last funding round was ginormous. When you raise hundreds of millions at a $1.5b valuation, you’re expected to sell above $1.5b at some point in the future. Any less and you didn’t live up to the opportunity that you pitched investors (and the financial outcomes for everyone deteriorates when you sell for way less than your valuation).
- neilv 3y ago
  Can I still attract VC, if I'm arguing for more modest valuations than competing lottery-ticket startups are? Or do I have to look like much more a traditional fundamentals investment, than a semirandom lottery ticket (or growth scam to exit)?
  - CitrusFruits 3y ago
    Not an expert here, but I have worked at a couple startups. The answer I would give is probably not: VCs basically work on a premise like this: 1 in 25 investments will return 100x, 5 in 25 will make they're money back, and the rest are just a wash. The only way the make money is if the company is mega successful, so they're not really interested if that's not a possibility. That being said, not every person at a VC is going to be super greedy or anything like that, it's just the nature of the business model for venture capital.
pixelmonkey 3y ago
Pragmatically, read "Venture Deals" and "Founder vs Investor" before you start your company. Then hire a reputable law firm and imagine you're an employee rather than a founder, and setup the initial structure in an employee friendly way. When raising your first round, have some non-negotiables that carry the structure forward. You can DM me on Twitter/X if you want more specifics based on my experience. Successful startup companies can and should compensate employees well with both cash and stock. It's only incompetence and greed that endangers this outcome. VC expectations are a red herring, only bad VCs are so short-sighted as to deprive a founder of one of the major tools of team-building (truly valuable company equity). As a founder, there are forces you have to fight against from first principles using your moral compass via a thoughtful fundraising strategy, but it can be done.
junofan 3y ago
Let your lawyers deal with it.
gangstead 3y ago
I don't think VC money cares whether you are soft on the employees. They are there to buy as big a slice of a small pie before it gets big. Anything you keep for yourself or give to your employees is pie that could be theirs. If they show up and you've already promised half the pie away they'll pay less for what's left, or you won't be one of 100 slices in their pie portfolio. Maybe you can convince them the motivated employees will lead to more growth, but it's not the type of thing they are normally swayed by. I think the end result is that it's probably not possible to pay employees with meaningful equity anymore so you'll have to go back to paying them the old fashioned way with money. I know I'm no longer willing to take RSU lotto tickets and a pay cut to work at a startup.