4 ms·

Correction, if you own what you create and perform too well, you become rich. It's when someone else owns it and has given you no incentive to perform well (99

by varelse 13y ago

Correction, if you own what you create and perform too well, you become rich. It's when someone else owns it and has given you no incentive to perform well (99% of startups) that you become a liability.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
wslh 13y ago
Correction, if you own what you create and perform too well, you become rich. Correction, it depends on where you was born and where you have lived.
- dredmorbius 13y ago
  Also where you was grammared.
  - wslh 13y ago
    Exactly!
- enraged_camel 13y ago
  That's not a correction. More like a nitpick.
  - Florin_Andrei 13y ago
    That "nit" that he's picked is kinda huge. But I agree it's not the only factor.
Hydraulix989 13y ago
I think that more than 1% of startups dish out equity/options, an incentive to perform well, and the impact of your work at a startup is immediately visible -- there's a tight reward feedback loop when the work you're doing helps the startup grow, is actionable, and increases its value (and the value of your equity). On the other hand, the big corporations are the ones with no incentives to perform well.
- varelse 13y ago
  Dream on. All the significant money I've made in the valley (and technically I could retire today if I were willing to move to Portland or Seattle) has been working for post-IPO companies with 1,000+ employees. When I get offers from startups, it's for chickenfeed equity (0.1 to 0.5%) for a series A or series B company with a senior liquidation preference they won't discuss with me. I have yet to see a company I've turned down do anything but die. The only downside I have seen to my strategy is sour grapes from ex-CEOs of failed startups at which I once worked during the dotcom boom insisting that I'm a bad hire because I left them once I realized they were doomed. So how does the following data update your worldview? http://www.businessinsider.com/a-google-programmer-blew-off-a-500000-salary-at-startup--because-hes-already-making-3-million-every-year-2014-1 http://www.businessinsider.com/a-google-programmer-blew-off-... Probably not at all I expect. I suspect we really see things differently. But assuming your title is not a TLA with single to double-digit equity, would you rather take a 1% chance at making a one-time hit of 5x to 6x a typical engineering salary E(X)= $10,000 to $50,000 or a guaranteed hit of $50,000 to $100,000 assuming you stay exactly where you are at a company with a decent growth rate? This assumes you flee the stinkers as fast as you possibly can with no tolerance for solos on the world's tiniest violin from the CEO/CTO/etc who has 20x-100x more equity than you and therefore a completely different set of incentives. Since most startups aren't facebook or google, I eventually learned to choose the latter and slowly accumulate wealth with occasional liquidity events(tm) rather than chase the rainbow of brogrammers and script kiddies.

by varelse 13y ago

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

wslh 13y ago

Correction, if you own what you create and perform too well, you become rich. Correction, it depends on where you was born and where you have lived.

dredmorbius 13y ago
Also where you was grammared.
- wslh 13y ago
  Exactly!
enraged_camel 13y ago
That's not a correction. More like a nitpick.
- Florin_Andrei 13y ago
  That "nit" that he's picked is kinda huge. But I agree it's not the only factor.

Hydraulix989 13y ago

I think that more than 1% of startups dish out equity/options, an incentive to perform well, and the impact of your work at a startup is immediately visible -- there's a tight reward feedback loop when the work you're doing helps the startup grow, is actionable, and increases its value (and the value of your equity). On the other hand, the big corporations are the ones with no incentives to perform well.

varelse 13y ago
Dream on. All the significant money I've made in the valley (and technically I could retire today if I were willing to move to Portland or Seattle) has been working for post-IPO companies with 1,000+ employees. When I get offers from startups, it's for chickenfeed equity (0.1 to 0.5%) for a series A or series B company with a senior liquidation preference they won't discuss with me. I have yet to see a company I've turned down do anything but die. The only downside I have seen to my strategy is sour grapes from ex-CEOs of failed startups at which I once worked during the dotcom boom insisting that I'm a bad hire because I left them once I realized they were doomed. So how does the following data update your worldview? http://www.businessinsider.com/a-google-programmer-blew-off-a-500000-salary-at-startup--because-hes-already-making-3-million-every-year-2014-1 http://www.businessinsider.com/a-google-programmer-blew-off-... Probably not at all I expect. I suspect we really see things differently. But assuming your title is not a TLA with single to double-digit equity, would you rather take a 1% chance at making a one-time hit of 5x to 6x a typical engineering salary E(X)= $10,000 to $50,000 or a guaranteed hit of $50,000 to $100,000 assuming you stay exactly where you are at a company with a decent growth rate? This assumes you flee the stinkers as fast as you possibly can with no tolerance for solos on the world's tiniest violin from the CEO/CTO/etc who has 20x-100x more equity than you and therefore a completely different set of incentives. Since most startups aren't facebook or google, I eventually learned to choose the latter and slowly accumulate wealth with occasional liquidity events(tm) rather than chase the rainbow of brogrammers and script kiddies.