3 ms·
That seems a bit low, for a well-funded company. $1 million per employee is more like the going rate. See for example: http://www.quora.com/What-is-a-typical-d
by cpncrunch 11y ago
That seems a bit low, for a well-funded company. $1 million per employee is more like the going rate. See for example:
http://www.quora.com/What-is-a-typical-deal-structure-of-an-acquihire http://www.quora.com/What-is-a-typical-deal-structure-of-an-...
- charlesdm 11y agoThese numbers are totally irrelevant to this situation. We're talking two small companies here. If there's no leverage, the chances of negotiating a better deal than described above are relatively slim.
- ojbyrne 11y agoHe says it's "bootstrapped."
- cpncrunch 11y agoThat won't make the difference between $60k and $1M. The main difference is that investors will be reluctant to lose money, so they'll push to at least get their principal back.
- AznHisoka 11y agoYou assume those deals scale down. Just because a company will pay $50 million for 50 engineers doesn't mean it's going to pay $1 million for 1 engineer. 50 engineers is magnitudes more valuable than 1 engineer.
- cpncrunch 11y agoGenerally most startups have one or two "star" employees, who actually created the startup. I would say that the single engineer in a one-man startup is worth a lot more than the average engineer in a 50-engineer startup. Instagram had 13 employees and was acquired for $1BN. Ptch had 3 employees and was purchased for $6.5M. In those cases the technology and product took up most of that value. If the acquirer is actually going to use your technology, that will obviously be a large factor in determining the sale price.