4 ms·

My response, in two parts: - Whatever - Pay me Here's the baseline: pay your people what they are worth and build something worth building. Everything else -

My response, in two parts: - Whatever - Pay me Here's the baseline: pay your people what they are worth and build something worth building. Everything else - free beer, foosball, catered lunches, tall ceilings, hardwood floors, is just details. This may be my curmudgeon coming out (I'm in my 20s, WTF), but this really rubbed me the wrong way: > "The Possibility of Making a Lot of Money" This is a myth that needs to die, and founders need to stop perpetuating it. It's insulting to be approached like that, with the assumption that I'm going to be so wowed by your beanbag chairs and artisanal coffee that I lose the ability to do basic arithmetic. The amount of equity I see being tossed around to employees - even relatively early ones - is pathetically little, while many founders strut around as if they're writing your yacht check personally with a 0.1-0.2% offer. If the amount of equity you're offering is supposed to trump cash, you better be bringing a lot of it to the table. But guess what, you're probably not. If you're not willing to pay market salaries, you can either bring >1%+ equity to the table or GTFO. > "In a successful start-up, the potential financial upside that comes from stock options can far outweigh a low base salary." LIES[1] [1] Barring Black Swan events.

georgemcbay 14y ago
"many founders strut around as if they're writing your yacht check personally with a 0.1-0.2% offer" It is even worse than you suggest for the not-a-founder-employee, the 0.1-0.2% offer is almost assuredly common stock and could easily turn into 0.001% via dilution that occurs in further fund raising rounds. Yes, you can still make a fantastic amount of money if you're strapped to a moonshot like Google or Facebook and the founders aren't completely manipulative dicks coughZyngacough, but even calling those "rare" (without a qualifier like 'super duper OMG so rare') as the article does is insulting.
rdtsc 14y ago
> It's insulting to be approached like that You are smart you won't but many kids will. You'd be amazed how much free lunches, and free espresso can do. The job needs to be cool because they need to be able to tell themselves that they work in a cool place and tell their friends that they work in a cool place. That story is worth quite a bit. Not only will they believe it, they will also work 60 hour weeks to make it happen. They only way I can see a trade-off is if they give me a lot more vacation time. Not 2 or 3 weeks but 6+. Can't pay me enough? Ok, good, let me have free time at least so I can relax, travel or work on my won projects then.
- fakeer 14y ago
  Working on your project regularly(as in everyday, not even every week) is entirely different from working on it every six months or each month using one of those extra leave days or weeks. So, the extra leave is hardly a worthwhile compensation if you are being paid less and working insanely more hours than normal.
carterschonwald 14y ago
well said. It needs to be said more often so that people eventually hear it though :) Seriously: if a company can't pay its people market, some combination of the following is true: the "biz guy" cofounder is doing a shit job, they don't value people, they don't have enough investor capital to pay people, and/or they're not making money. Realistically, all of the above! (since most startups fail :) )
wyclif 14y ago
"There's no shortage of smart, hardworking engineers. There's a shortage of smart, hardworking engineers willing to work for very little money." ~ David "Pardo" Keppel

georgemcbay 14y ago

"many founders strut around as if they're writing your yacht check personally with a 0.1-0.2% offer" It is even worse than you suggest for the not-a-founder-employee, the 0.1-0.2% offer is almost assuredly common stock and could easily turn into 0.001% via dilution that occurs in further fund raising rounds. Yes, you can still make a fantastic amount of money if you're strapped to a moonshot like Google or Facebook and the founders aren't completely manipulative dicks coughZyngacough, but even calling those "rare" (without a qualifier like 'super duper OMG so rare') as the article does is insulting.

rdtsc 14y ago

> It's insulting to be approached like that You are smart you won't but many kids will. You'd be amazed how much free lunches, and free espresso can do. The job needs to be cool because they need to be able to tell themselves that they work in a cool place and tell their friends that they work in a cool place. That story is worth quite a bit. Not only will they believe it, they will also work 60 hour weeks to make it happen. They only way I can see a trade-off is if they give me a lot more vacation time. Not 2 or 3 weeks but 6+. Can't pay me enough? Ok, good, let me have free time at least so I can relax, travel or work on my won projects then.

fakeer 14y ago
Working on your project regularly(as in everyday, not even every week) is entirely different from working on it every six months or each month using one of those extra leave days or weeks. So, the extra leave is hardly a worthwhile compensation if you are being paid less and working insanely more hours than normal.

carterschonwald 14y ago

well said. It needs to be said more often so that people eventually hear it though :) Seriously: if a company can't pay its people market, some combination of the following is true: the "biz guy" cofounder is doing a shit job, they don't value people, they don't have enough investor capital to pay people, and/or they're not making money. Realistically, all of the above! (since most startups fail :) )

wyclif 14y ago

"There's no shortage of smart, hardworking engineers. There's a shortage of smart, hardworking engineers willing to work for very little money." ~ David "Pardo" Keppel