4 ms·

> I don't agree that founders deserve as much as > Spolsky thinks... I've always read Spolsky's advice like this: "If you literally can't build the business

by jt2190 13y ago

> I don't agree that founders deserve as much as > Spolsky thinks... I've always read Spolsky's advice like this: "If you literally can't build the business without the other person, make them an equal partner." I agree that founders should think long and hard about this, because there are very few scenarios that require a fifty-fifty partner, and many that require high-skilled, but not unique, people.

danielweber 13y ago
Back in 1996 it was recognized as one of the classic start-up mistakes. It's so old I could only find a PDF: http://www.yesatyale.org/files/lecture_06.pdf http://www.yesatyale.org/files/lecture_06.pdf I think vesting might avoid the problem, but I tend to think one person is probably more invested in the start-up and should take charge. I've seen too many times where "everyone is responsible" leads to "no one is responsible."
- tptacek 13y ago
  You need to designate someone as the tie-breaking authority for disputes, but it doesn't follow from that that you need to give that person more compensation. Two things that would keep me from joining any founding team at this point in my career: * Not having everyone on a 4-year vesting schedule, founders included * Not giving equal shares to the partners I'm with Spolsky: if you think it doesn't make sense to give a "founder" the same share as yourself, that person isn't really a founder.