Re:Startup Employees Invoke Obscure Law to Open Up Books
by gohrt on Tuesday May 24, 2016 @04:59PM
(#11765431)
ballpark is nearly uses. The difference between X and 2X is huge and it's very hard to make the estimate tighter, and you don't know what not-profit metrics will impress investors to put more cash into further growth. Many many companies run for 10 years pre-profit.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Startup Employees Invoke Obscure Law to Open Up Books
by caminante on Tuesday May 24, 2016 @05:18PM
(#11765576)
I think even in your "non-GAAP" metric case, I would hope an employee has an idea of the risks and isn't banking on near-term payouts (months, not years).
Parent's merely suggesting a Q&D sanity check that would help a lot of people who choose blissful ignorance. If you feel like I'm oversimplifying, would you mind elaborating further or sharing examples?
Re:Startup Employees Invoke Obscure Law to Open Up Books
by zenlikethat on Tuesday May 24, 2016 @05:11PM
(#11765527)
If you're not prepared to take the risk of the company going under, why work for a startup at all?
Re:Startup Employees Invoke Obscure Law to Open Up Books
by st3v3r on Tuesday May 24, 2016 @06:28PM
(#11766038)
Completely irrelevant.
Re:Startup Employees Invoke Obscure Law to Open Up Books
by zenlikethat on Tuesday May 24, 2016 @07:47PM
(#11766560)
How so? Understanding risk is not relevant to working at a risky-by-definition startup?