3 ms·

Just from reading their formula, I would be uncomfortable knowing (assuming engineer here) that founders have both a higher salary and orders of magnitude more

Just from reading their formula, I would be uncomfortable knowing (assuming engineer here) that founders have both a higher salary and orders of magnitude more equity than me. I thought founders would take less salary in exchange for significant ownership. Or is that only the cAse in pre-seed/seriesA startups?

noir_lord 13y ago
Interesting how differently we view things. I'd find it irrelevant what the founder was getting paid as long as I was getting paid the "right amount" for the work I was doing against market rates and I found it an enjoyable place to work. The only time I would care about what the founders where paying themselves was if I was taking a reduced salary for some reason (and to be honest with the programmer job market the way that it is it would have to be a damn good reason). The reality is that if you are paid like an employee that is because you are an employee and the owners/founders will get paid more or as my grandfather used to put it "No-one gets rich working for someone else". I like the idea of a completely transparent company and will be interesting to watch them grow (hopefully).
rdl 13y ago
It's a little unfair to ask younger founders (who probably don't have real savings, and may have student debt) to take really low salaries on a long-term basis. I think Peter Thiel thinks around $100-150k is the right amount. I do think it should be less than most senior employees, and on the order of a straight-from-Stanford hire (so probably a 1.1x factor on their chart?). But, taking no salary for a while while starting up, and a $20-30k/yr salary for a while, really gets old, so it's totally reasonable for founders to be in the $50-150k range. What you absolutely don't want is for founders (or any employee) to be unproductive at work due to stressing over money or problems easily solved with money at home.

noir_lord 13y ago

Interesting how differently we view things. I'd find it irrelevant what the founder was getting paid as long as I was getting paid the "right amount" for the work I was doing against market rates and I found it an enjoyable place to work. The only time I would care about what the founders where paying themselves was if I was taking a reduced salary for some reason (and to be honest with the programmer job market the way that it is it would have to be a damn good reason). The reality is that if you are paid like an employee that is because you are an employee and the owners/founders will get paid more or as my grandfather used to put it "No-one gets rich working for someone else". I like the idea of a completely transparent company and will be interesting to watch them grow (hopefully).

rdl 13y ago

It's a little unfair to ask younger founders (who probably don't have real savings, and may have student debt) to take really low salaries on a long-term basis. I think Peter Thiel thinks around $100-150k is the right amount. I do think it should be less than most senior employees, and on the order of a straight-from-Stanford hire (so probably a 1.1x factor on their chart?). But, taking no salary for a while while starting up, and a $20-30k/yr salary for a while, really gets old, so it's totally reasonable for founders to be in the $50-150k range. What you absolutely don't want is for founders (or any employee) to be unproductive at work due to stressing over money or problems easily solved with money at home.