2 ms·

Thanks for the info. I hack a fair bit (mostly LAMP, where P = perl). I've created a few apps, both web and desktop, and have built a few various departments

by brk 19y ago

Thanks for the info. I hack a fair bit (mostly LAMP, where P = perl). I've created a few apps, both web and desktop, and have built a few various departments for companies, and have hired hackers in the past to work for me. I've been on both sides of this 2% equity "problem". If you guys all want to rally around the idea that the first developer in any startup is worth a double-digit stake based on nothing other than a spirit of camaraderie, that's fine with me, and I'm not offended by being modded down. If you look at my various posts, I never said this guy WASN'T worth more than 2%, but I did say that there are more factors to consider. Anyway, thanks for the info.

anamax 19y ago
It's not the title, it's the reward for risk and contribution. Right now, it's an unfundable idea. If his contribution makes it fundable, that's significant.
sbraford 19y ago
brk - yup, there very well indeed may be more factors to consider. I'm with several other posters on this one: - 2% + a modest first-developer salary is totally reasonable (some would even consider 2% high here) - 2% + $0 is a fool's bargain indeed Any remotely successful entrepreneur could scrape up at the very least $5-10k to get a prototype working. These potential co-founders sound more like guys with an idea who just want someone to develop it for them (do much of the hard work), while paying / cutting in equity wise very little. These guys don't sound like they can be bargained with, but the developer could ask for $200k in cash compensation if/when the startup gets funded. (doubtful they'd go for this)