3 ms·

What are you expecting from pre-Series A startups? There are lots of pre-Series A startups with six figures in funding and little to no revenue. For obvious rea

What are you expecting from pre-Series A startups? There are lots of pre-Series A startups with six figures in funding and little to no revenue. For obvious reasons, most of them are not going to be paying $140,000/year and if they are, you might not be comfortable with the runway risk. In terms of equity, since you mentioned that you are the breadwinner for your family, why are you sweating the equity? A lot of folks here will no doubt suggest that you negotiate for more equity, but equity won't pay your bills. If cash is your biggest concern, negotiating around equity is pointless. It sounds like you want a very early-stage startup job with BigCo-like pay, meaningful equity and reasonable hours. For the most part, this is a dream.

ebiester 12y ago
So, why the hell would anyone leave that much money on the table? If you're asking me to do something crazy, you better be willing to pay for it. .5% equity, especially when it will end up being diluted, is a fool's game.
- 7Figures2Commas 12y ago
  > So, why the hell would anyone leave that much money on the table? If you're asking me to do something crazy, you better be willing to pay for it. At most early-stage startups, there is no money on the table. If you want to maximize your earnings, focusing your job search on pre-Series A startups is a horrible waste of time. The OP seems to be asking for startup excitement, reasonable hours, high salary and meaningful equity. At a pre-Series A startup, you might be able to find two of the four. > .5% equity, especially when it will end up being diluted, is a fool's game. Rhetorical exercise: 1. What's .5% of $0? 2. What's 2% of $0? 3. What's 10% of $0? Equity at early-stage startups is a fool's game.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - aledalgrande 12y ago
    Yes, 5% of $0 is still $0.
  - ant6n 12y ago
    The expected value of a startup, even pre-Series A, is not 0.
    - 7Figures2Commas 12y ago
      You seem to be confusing the expected value of a startup with the value of one's equity. There is a reason that the vast majority of vested stock options go unexercised when employees leave companies. Additionally, you are not factoring in liquidation preferences. Rhetorical question: what's 10% of $10 million when your investors put in $5 million and have a 2x liquidation preference?
      - ant6n 12y ago
        You seem to not understand the notion of expected value. If the strike price is a concern, it could probably be negotiated down. I had the impression the they have generally gone down anyway.
        7Figures2Commas 12y ago
        > If the strike price is a concern, it could probably be negotiated down. Please ask a qualified accountant about Section 409A of the tax code and what happens if you're granted stock options at less than fair market value.
- nickstinemates 12y ago
  Even worse, it's 0.05%.
jnbiche 12y ago
A lot of us understand pre-Series A startups are cash poor, and for the right company, wouldn't mind working for (reasonably) less cash. But 0.05% equity? Seriously, that's insulting. Don't these morons want their employees to be motivated? Isn't that the point of equity?
- seekingcharlie 12y ago
  I'm curious - what's a reasonable SF salary/equity comp in this situation?
geebee 12y ago
I'd like to start by saying that in many ways, your post is grounded in reality. If you want a well paid, stable job, then yeah, early stage startups with equity probably aren't the best thing for you. Here's the problem - almost all silicon valley hiring, compensation, equity, and work conditions are now viewed in the context of an absolute insistence from employers that there is a critical shortage of software engineers (remarkably, a claim that is made with absolutely no data on compensation, equity, work conditions, and long term career opportunities offered relative to the jobs available to highly educated and hard working people in other segments of the economy). So you say that the idea of a well paid job with substantial equity in an early stage startup is a dream, but to a lot of us watching this, it seems like the people being outrageously unrealistic are the ones trying to hire talented programmers for ludicrously low wages and equity. The difference is, I'm not going to congress claiming someone owes me a job on the terms I've decided are fair. But these employers seem to think that if they can't hire under their conditions (in this case, in a company that may be gone in 6 months, at a salary far too low to support a family with a child, with equity too low to be worth much under almost any outcome other than a few shoot-the-moon scenarios), congress needs to get involved in increasing the number of programmers available for hire.

ebiester 12y ago

So, why the hell would anyone leave that much money on the table? If you're asking me to do something crazy, you better be willing to pay for it. .5% equity, especially when it will end up being diluted, is a fool's game.

7Figures2Commas 12y ago
> So, why the hell would anyone leave that much money on the table? If you're asking me to do something crazy, you better be willing to pay for it. At most early-stage startups, there is no money on the table. If you want to maximize your earnings, focusing your job search on pre-Series A startups is a horrible waste of time. The OP seems to be asking for startup excitement, reasonable hours, high salary and meaningful equity. At a pre-Series A startup, you might be able to find two of the four. > .5% equity, especially when it will end up being diluted, is a fool's game. Rhetorical exercise: 1. What's .5% of $0? 2. What's 2% of $0? 3. What's 10% of $0? Equity at early-stage startups is a fool's game.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- aledalgrande 12y ago
  Yes, 5% of $0 is still $0.
- ant6n 12y ago
  The expected value of a startup, even pre-Series A, is not 0.
  - 7Figures2Commas 12y ago
    You seem to be confusing the expected value of a startup with the value of one's equity. There is a reason that the vast majority of vested stock options go unexercised when employees leave companies. Additionally, you are not factoring in liquidation preferences. Rhetorical question: what's 10% of $10 million when your investors put in $5 million and have a 2x liquidation preference?
    - ant6n 12y ago
      You seem to not understand the notion of expected value. If the strike price is a concern, it could probably be negotiated down. I had the impression the they have generally gone down anyway.
      - 7Figures2Commas 12y ago
        > If the strike price is a concern, it could probably be negotiated down. Please ask a qualified accountant about Section 409A of the tax code and what happens if you're granted stock options at less than fair market value.
nickstinemates 12y ago
Even worse, it's 0.05%.

jnbiche 12y ago

A lot of us understand pre-Series A startups are cash poor, and for the right company, wouldn't mind working for (reasonably) less cash. But 0.05% equity? Seriously, that's insulting. Don't these morons want their employees to be motivated? Isn't that the point of equity?

seekingcharlie 12y ago
I'm curious - what's a reasonable SF salary/equity comp in this situation?

geebee 12y ago

I'd like to start by saying that in many ways, your post is grounded in reality. If you want a well paid, stable job, then yeah, early stage startups with equity probably aren't the best thing for you. Here's the problem - almost all silicon valley hiring, compensation, equity, and work conditions are now viewed in the context of an absolute insistence from employers that there is a critical shortage of software engineers (remarkably, a claim that is made with absolutely no data on compensation, equity, work conditions, and long term career opportunities offered relative to the jobs available to highly educated and hard working people in other segments of the economy). So you say that the idea of a well paid job with substantial equity in an early stage startup is a dream, but to a lot of us watching this, it seems like the people being outrageously unrealistic are the ones trying to hire talented programmers for ludicrously low wages and equity. The difference is, I'm not going to congress claiming someone owes me a job on the terms I've decided are fair. But these employers seem to think that if they can't hire under their conditions (in this case, in a company that may be gone in 6 months, at a salary far too low to support a family with a child, with equity too low to be worth much under almost any outcome other than a few shoot-the-moon scenarios), congress needs to get involved in increasing the number of programmers available for hire.