3 ms·

Thanks for the link. > The founders should end up with about 50% of the company, total. Each of the next five layers should end up with about 10% of the compan

by kzhahou 12y ago

Thanks for the link. > The founders should end up with about 50% of the company, total. Each of the next five layers should end up with about 10% of the company, split equally among everyone in the layer. This is the typical, and exploitative, arrangement in silicon valley! In today's climate, the founders often get money very early and start hiring right away. They have no real personal risk in the venture, and even if it fails completely their "founder" status will serve them well at the next go-round. The founders had an idea and some rough prototype, but the product is built and the company direction is executed by the next 10 people, and the next 10, and so on. But while the first 10 Employees get to share 10 percent of the company, they sit side-by-side with the 3 founders who have 10-20 times as much as any one of them. We all take it for granted that the founders' contribution should be worth so much more than mere employees. But who writes these blog posts on how to distribute equity, with 50% to founders and 10% to each "layer" after? Well, it's not the employees. It's the investors and founders themselves, who need to solidly stand behind the idea that at a company that faced failure every day and with every competitor launch and had to get every aspect right, in the end the people at the top should enjoy mega-riches and early retirement, while the lowly workers enjoy a nice bonus equivalent to a year or two salary. ---- If you believe in avc.com's guide of 50% to founders and 10% to each subsequent "layer", I would counter that the founding team is itself a layer, and each layer should be compensated equally. There is no justification for the first layer (founders) owning as much as the other layers combined.

nostrademons 12y ago
If you believe it's exploitative, why not take the other side of the trade? Go become a startup founder yourself. Lots and lots of people in Silicon Valley do that, and ultimately, that's what's causes market correction. If there are way more startups out there than talented engineers capable of building products, then the engineers can negotiate a much better deal for themselves. Or they don't and go out of business, but if that's the case, then your initial assumption that they have no real personal risk in the venture doesn't hold. I know a senior engineer (Boston area, not Silicon Valley) that's made multiple millions multiple times as an early employee. She comes in to startups after they've fucked up their v1 so badly that they can't bring it to market, negotiates a very sweet equity package, fixes the product, and then cashes out when they IPO or get bought.
- kzhahou 12y ago
  > Go become a startup founder yourself. The issue isn't me. And, I might already be a founder. That's besides the point. I'm happy for your friend. That's excellent, to be able to negotiate well. Most people don't. And most people are TOLD, repeatedly, that 1% is an "excellent" percent even as the earliest joining a company. The word "exploitative" is as tricky today as in centuries past. If the employee doesn't want to work for peanuts, why not go somewhere else? The market will eventually correct, compensate everyone fairly (by some definition of "fair"), etc. Well, my argument is not that the market itself is broken, because employees enter them under free will. My point is that engineers (early and otherwise) should not accept that their contribution is worth so much less than the 2-3 people on top. This is especially true for the first engineer, who joins at 1% next to the founder at 40%, but it applies to every after as well.
  - AstroChimpHam 12y ago
    I've been both a founder and an early employee. As an early employee, I always received a salary, and knew I could leave any time I felt like it. My level of risk was low, and I was perfectly happy with my equity knowing I had a nice upside without much downside at all. As a founder, I haven't paid myself in months, and have commitments to my customers such that I 100% can't just shut things down and leave to do something else without killing a lot of relationships and getting a terrible reputation. Of course, I can only speak to my own experience, but I'm satisfied with my amount of equity in both situations.
    - rday 12y ago
      I've been a founder and an early employee as well. As a founder, you sign on for the bad times. As an early employee, I always got duped. As an early employee, I've had to go without a paycheck on multiple occasions. I had to go without healthcare for several months even though I was told the company already had it in place. Sure, I could leave anytime I wanted. But I would forfeit all my stock if I left. Even if I left because they stopped paying their engineers. Besides, the money was coming. Why leave now? They promise they will make it up. I've been told that everyone in the company had to take a 20% salary reduction to keep things alive. I could have left then too. Again, forfeiting my shares. But again, I bore the downside of the business without anywhere near the potential upside. The important part is that none of this was malicious. The founder just had no idea what he was doing, and thought they had to lie for the good of the company. As an early employee, I hired people into both the companies I'm speaking about. I'll never do that again. I haven't ever done that again. I urge everyone to not be the first engineer.

by kzhahou 12y ago

nostrademons 12y ago

If you believe it's exploitative, why not take the other side of the trade? Go become a startup founder yourself. Lots and lots of people in Silicon Valley do that, and ultimately, that's what's causes market correction. If there are way more startups out there than talented engineers capable of building products, then the engineers can negotiate a much better deal for themselves. Or they don't and go out of business, but if that's the case, then your initial assumption that they have no real personal risk in the venture doesn't hold. I know a senior engineer (Boston area, not Silicon Valley) that's made multiple millions multiple times as an early employee. She comes in to startups after they've fucked up their v1 so badly that they can't bring it to market, negotiates a very sweet equity package, fixes the product, and then cashes out when they IPO or get bought.

kzhahou 12y ago
> Go become a startup founder yourself. The issue isn't me. And, I might already be a founder. That's besides the point. I'm happy for your friend. That's excellent, to be able to negotiate well. Most people don't. And most people are TOLD, repeatedly, that 1% is an "excellent" percent even as the earliest joining a company. The word "exploitative" is as tricky today as in centuries past. If the employee doesn't want to work for peanuts, why not go somewhere else? The market will eventually correct, compensate everyone fairly (by some definition of "fair"), etc. Well, my argument is not that the market itself is broken, because employees enter them under free will. My point is that engineers (early and otherwise) should not accept that their contribution is worth so much less than the 2-3 people on top. This is especially true for the first engineer, who joins at 1% next to the founder at 40%, but it applies to every after as well.
- AstroChimpHam 12y ago
  I've been both a founder and an early employee. As an early employee, I always received a salary, and knew I could leave any time I felt like it. My level of risk was low, and I was perfectly happy with my equity knowing I had a nice upside without much downside at all. As a founder, I haven't paid myself in months, and have commitments to my customers such that I 100% can't just shut things down and leave to do something else without killing a lot of relationships and getting a terrible reputation. Of course, I can only speak to my own experience, but I'm satisfied with my amount of equity in both situations.
  - rday 12y ago
    I've been a founder and an early employee as well. As a founder, you sign on for the bad times. As an early employee, I always got duped. As an early employee, I've had to go without a paycheck on multiple occasions. I had to go without healthcare for several months even though I was told the company already had it in place. Sure, I could leave anytime I wanted. But I would forfeit all my stock if I left. Even if I left because they stopped paying their engineers. Besides, the money was coming. Why leave now? They promise they will make it up. I've been told that everyone in the company had to take a 20% salary reduction to keep things alive. I could have left then too. Again, forfeiting my shares. But again, I bore the downside of the business without anywhere near the potential upside. The important part is that none of this was malicious. The founder just had no idea what he was doing, and thought they had to lie for the good of the company. As an early employee, I hired people into both the companies I'm speaking about. I'll never do that again. I haven't ever done that again. I urge everyone to not be the first engineer.