4 ms·
Stories like this often have a lot of missing details that would provide more context and explain why things played out the way it did. I have no doubt the fou
by takinola 3y ago
Stories like this often have a lot of missing details that would provide more context and explain why things played out the way it did. I have no doubt the founders knew the risks they were taking and signed up for it. However, the big question is whether the employees knew the risk they had been signed up for. The lack of transparency for employees is where the big problem lies. If you are a non-exec level employee at a startup where most of your compensation is in private securities, you should apply a significant discount to your valuation to account for this opacity.
- vidarh 3y agoThat's true, and good advice. I tell people straight up when I interview at startups that I value their shares near zero until/unless they can prove to me they're not. If they can't, that's fine, and I'll apply a significant discount no matter what, but my base salary need to be accordingly. For starters, in any early stage startup I'd discount by 90%+ just because it's a startup, entirely irrespective of whether I like the idea, and what investors think.
- rightbyte 3y ago> you should apply a significant discount to your valuation to account for this opacity. It wouldn't suprise me if the estimated value of those is negative. I.e. your wage will be lower due to "wage dumping" by gamblers. I did not find amy stats on the median or average payout.