The 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 o

The 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.