3 ms·
Here's my initial concerns, reading your post and reading your posting on craigslist. You need avoid looking like a business guy with an idea (and without a clu
by lbrandy 18y ago
Here's my initial concerns, reading your post and reading your posting on craigslist. You need avoid looking like a business guy with an idea (and without a clue) looking for a coder. I'd work very, very hard to avoid that because technical people will avoid you like the plague.
1. How many other team members are there? This is a website we are building, right? What are all these other people doing to earn their equity? Am I the only technical person? Be honest, how much would I -really- need your non-technical staff to build and run this site on my own?
2. Why am I not a founder? Why is this a "job"? Do I have a boss? Who is it? Why do I need one? Can I be fired?
3. If I am the only technical person, do I have full control of the technology? If I tell you that going with Ruby was an awful idea, are you going to listen? If you are, I really should be the CTO. If you aren't, then it sounds like I have a boss.
4. How much equity are we talking about? Do you think you can get a "coder" to build your website and add your features for a few % equity? Do you guys really understand how much you need a technical person? Or am I going to be viewed like an employee by a bunch of business guys with an "idea"? Are coders a commodity to you?
5. If I was taking an equity-only job, it would be for founder-level only. Anything else, in my mind, would be silly. If this is -not- the case, you need to make it extremely compelling and work very hard at avoiding all the pitfalls, because you are already fighting the most difficult uphill battle there is.
ETA: it took me awhile to write this, but even now, you'll see alot of posts by devs already "raging" against this concept as a bunch of "business guys" who appear to be severely underestimating and undervaluing technical contributes whilst simultaneously overvaluing their own contributions. If this is -not- the case, you have to work extremely hard because that's going to be the default position all technical people take.
- swombat 18y ago3. If I am the only technical person, do I have full control of the technology? If I tell you that going with Ruby was an awful idea, are you going to listen? If you are, I really should be the CTO. If you aren't, then it sounds like I have a boss. And that boss is the CTO. If they're not qualified to be a CTO, then I would run.
- fallen 18y agoif that is the case, then it should be clear in the job posting whether you are the CTO, software architect, lead developer or just an unfortunate code monkey at the bottom of the heap.
- netcan 18y agoThe points made above are the common ones when relating to these sorts of issues. What is often missing (it seems to me) is any points relating to scale. How old the company is. What are there chances of success? Have they taken investors? If so, wouldn't there be a valuation of some sort? I know that these are not easy questions to answer. But none of those above questions really allow you to equate a salary to this job. Maybe another question is appropriate: "If this was a salary only job, how much would I be paid?" I guess you value that in equity somehow. multiply by something to account for the risk. Employees are at more risk then investors. Actually it's very interesting reading the reactions on this thread. (a) We have hostility to the very concept. Seems that just considering it is a sign of disrespect. (b) We have a lot of accusatory questions relating to the respect & prestige of the position. Even questions of equity seem like a proxy to respect. 'Why am I not a founder?' In the absence of a salary, they are not concerned with receiving a fair substitute for salary. They are concerned with the other issues.
- swombat 18y agoIn the absence of a salary, they are not concerned with receiving a fair substitute for salary. They are concerned with the other issues. That's because "working for equity" is exactly the same as "working for free". Equity has no value until the company has proven itself. If you were working for a company that said that you have a 95% chance of not getting your salary, and a 5% chance of getting your salary 2 years later, you would consider that working for free. If you accept the idea of working for free (which many of us founders do), then it's the other things that matter.