3 ms·

I always ask on question to every business, and nonprofit. How much were, are the founders of the company making per year? It's usually a lie. I've also notice

I always ask on question to every business, and nonprofit. How much were, are the founders of the company making per year? It's usually a lie. I've also noticed when young entrepreneurs are given a large amount of money; they don't quite realize that it's probally all the big money they will ever see. I know I didn't. I made a lot of money in my twenties, thinking it would always be this easy. Sometimes, the availability of money is just because you were at the right place at the right time; people underplay luck--especially people in their twenties, or rich kids. Rich kids have their parents to fall back on. Poor kids will never have that safety net. I don't know anything about this company, but their situation is not unique--it's the norm, that's why I cringed reading the article and looking at the pictures. I've seen it too many times before.

AndrewKemendo 13y ago
It is staggering to me some of the salaries that founders give themselves. I remember reading a tip for pitchdecks/term sheets that if you put your founder salary as anything above 150k that is slightly too high for most offers. That is insane to me. I make less than 80k a year, in D.C., with a mortgage and two kids while I build on the side. A cursory glance tells me most founders aren't under such strict cost regimes. If and when I get funding and go full time I would take the absolute minimum to keep us fed and watered (~60k). How a founder could do otherwise to me is unconscionable.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- shin_lao 13y ago
  70 k/year doesn't make a difference and it's not a good thing to have founders struggling with money. If your brain is too focused on the trivialities of life you can't invest yourself 100% in the company.
  - AndrewKemendo 13y ago
    Apparently it would have in this case. That would have been two months of AWS for each founder, so saying it doesn't make a difference is clearly wrong. I didn't say pay yourself nothing - pay yourself the minimum amount you have to in order to keep your life from impeding your work. If that means you need luxuries to be comfortable, then your lunch will get eaten by someone who is more spartan.

AndrewKemendo 13y ago

It is staggering to me some of the salaries that founders give themselves. I remember reading a tip for pitchdecks/term sheets that if you put your founder salary as anything above 150k that is slightly too high for most offers. That is insane to me. I make less than 80k a year, in D.C., with a mortgage and two kids while I build on the side. A cursory glance tells me most founders aren't under such strict cost regimes. If and when I get funding and go full time I would take the absolute minimum to keep us fed and watered (~60k). How a founder could do otherwise to me is unconscionable.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
shin_lao 13y ago
70 k/year doesn't make a difference and it's not a good thing to have founders struggling with money. If your brain is too focused on the trivialities of life you can't invest yourself 100% in the company.
- AndrewKemendo 13y ago
  Apparently it would have in this case. That would have been two months of AWS for each founder, so saying it doesn't make a difference is clearly wrong. I didn't say pay yourself nothing - pay yourself the minimum amount you have to in order to keep your life from impeding your work. If that means you need luxuries to be comfortable, then your lunch will get eaten by someone who is more spartan.