3 ms·
Is it possible that having to use one's 2% majority share to force a decision is just as bad as a deadlock? (as far as affecting morale, a founder leaving, etc.
by nathos 17y ago
Is it possible that having to use one's 2% majority share to force a decision is just as bad as a deadlock? (as far as affecting morale, a founder leaving, etc.)
We've had the 51/49 split driven into our heads for so long, I wonder if anyone out there can share the ramifications of actually having to use it.
- dstorrs 17y agoMy co-founder and I took a different tack: "50/50 and a quarter". - 50/50 split on equity - Decisions are made by consensus when possible (so far, always). - If we absolutely cannot agree, we flip a coin (a quarter) - If either of us decides to leave the company, the other must buy him out. So, if we ever actually get to a coinflip decision, we just ask ourselves "do I care about this so much that I'm willing to walk if I lose, or will I live with it?" Whatever the answer is, the decision can go forward.