3 ms·
That strikes me as a terrible idea. His plan would have the founders constantly second-guessing each other over reaching milestones, and would take ordinary di
by ispivey 18y ago
That strikes me as a terrible idea. His plan would have the founders constantly second-guessing each other over reaching milestones, and would take ordinary disputes ("You never start work before 11AM"; "The design work is taking 3x as long as the development, you're a bottleneck") and turn them into knock-down drag-out brawls over equity every few months.
I'm a fan of splitting things up at the beginning, attaching a vesting schedule, and having everyone work as hard as possible.
You also shouldn't have this conversation until everyone's committed to working full-time on a business. Trying to give equity to someone who has a day job and promises to leave "when the new business is really underway" is a disaster in the making.
- kjw 18y agoAgreed. As many have said, Seth's post sounds like a terrible idea. Although there's no simple solution, an up-front equity split will have fewer potential problems down the road. Whereas vesting is just linked with the passage of time, putting in milestones is very dangerous. It can lead to all sorts of erratic behavior, all in the name of achieving milestones, which may or may not be relevant. You can't just look into the future and know what the right goals will be. VCs definitely include vesting schedules but tend to avoid milestones.