3 ms·
>At such an early stage, 25% and no salary would usually be considered a co-founder. Of course, there's no legal definition so in actuality it's whatever you ag
by itsoktocry 2y ago
>At such an early stage, 25% and no salary would usually be considered a co-founder. Of course, there's no legal definition so in actuality it's whatever you agree to. This situation is very common, where a founder didn't really derisk the company as much as he perceived.
This is strange Silicon Valley vernacular.
In the real world, a "co-founder" is someone who founds the company.
- psyklic 2y ago> In the real world, a "co-founder" is someone who founds the company. In the real world too, not all founders are there at the exact moment the company is incorporated. If I incorporate a company, 6 months later have little accomplished, then realize I need skilled people to come all-in for equity -- they're certainly going to be co-founders. In this case we lack the full story, but this company likely would still be considered very early. They're raising a seed round and asking someone who would be critical for growth to risk everything only for equity (presumably). If he wasn't critical, the entrepreneur would likely wait until after funding and hire a founding engineer.