4 ms·

The past is a "sunk cost". Start from today. Who is doing what into the future. Do not undervalue a founder who can bring in investment but equally do not over

by bdfh42 17y ago

The past is a "sunk cost". Start from today. Who is doing what into the future. Do not undervalue a founder who can bring in investment but equally do not over-value this attribute. Think about how you would go about compensating another developer joining the team - how would that change the stock split - do you need to reserve shares for future contributors. If you must go 50:50 with a salary (when income flows) - negotiate how you can convert salary into stock.

jacquesm 17y ago
To bring investment can be covered with a success fee when the deal is inked, it does not warrant a 50% stake pre-money in the company.
yalurker 17y ago
The past is not a "sunk cost" given the IP issue. It sounds like the poster just continued research the prof was already doing in his lab. At an extreme, suppose OP just abandoned the prof and started the company solo. Certainly the prof could later sue for his fair share. I would suspect the University (and/or agency the research funding came from) may have some IP rights here too. Essentially, you can't just treat this as "the start of a business". You need to look at it as "we invented something in the lab, and now we want to sell it". He can certainly negotiate, but 50/50 does not sound unreasonable. One key component in my mind would be "how much value was created already" versus "how much value will be added in the coming months/years".
- atiw 17y ago
  Well, let me put it this way. I am not going to abandon my prof in any case, both due to respect and sense of legality and righteousness. What I want is to figure out a way to make everyone happy, future investors, and both of us. But I agree with yalurker, in the sense that: yes, this is something invented in the lab, only by me and my prof, and we want to sell it since it's so matured now. The university is going to release the IP to both of us, and we will be paying the university an agreed upon share, it's 10% as we have been told. So, really it's more like an issue between our shares that's troubling me so much. In a perfect world, he could have joined me in the venture and i would have gladly made it 50-50 (hell, i would have even gone for 55-45), or maybe i wouldn't have told my peers this and never would have been asking this question anyways, both to myself and to all of you. If only it was a perfect world.... I hope somehow we get close enough to the magic number, which would make everyone happy.

by bdfh42 17y ago

jacquesm 17y ago

To bring investment can be covered with a success fee when the deal is inked, it does not warrant a 50% stake pre-money in the company.

yalurker 17y ago

The past is not a "sunk cost" given the IP issue. It sounds like the poster just continued research the prof was already doing in his lab. At an extreme, suppose OP just abandoned the prof and started the company solo. Certainly the prof could later sue for his fair share. I would suspect the University (and/or agency the research funding came from) may have some IP rights here too. Essentially, you can't just treat this as "the start of a business". You need to look at it as "we invented something in the lab, and now we want to sell it". He can certainly negotiate, but 50/50 does not sound unreasonable. One key component in my mind would be "how much value was created already" versus "how much value will be added in the coming months/years".

atiw 17y ago
Well, let me put it this way. I am not going to abandon my prof in any case, both due to respect and sense of legality and righteousness. What I want is to figure out a way to make everyone happy, future investors, and both of us. But I agree with yalurker, in the sense that: yes, this is something invented in the lab, only by me and my prof, and we want to sell it since it's so matured now. The university is going to release the IP to both of us, and we will be paying the university an agreed upon share, it's 10% as we have been told. So, really it's more like an issue between our shares that's troubling me so much. In a perfect world, he could have joined me in the venture and i would have gladly made it 50-50 (hell, i would have even gone for 55-45), or maybe i wouldn't have told my peers this and never would have been asking this question anyways, both to myself and to all of you. If only it was a perfect world.... I hope somehow we get close enough to the magic number, which would make everyone happy.