Yeah, but about the second time you realize you broke your promise to a new hire you should be changing what you promise (or fixing the real problem, if that mentoring and support is indeed needed).

I agree wholeheartedly. One issue is that every "promise" is a bit unique. HN posters are big on mentoring and interesting work, which are subjective qualifications, but this is not the case for everyone. Some people just want a salary and a chair-- much easier to promise.

The incentive to mentor is long-term. It benefits the company later on, and loyalty is an asset for the person doing the mentoring (his proteges might move with him if he gets sacked). Unfortunately, few people think this far ahead. In the short term, mentoring is an expense.

Startup execs fully realize that their pitches and figures are incredibly optimistic (read: improbable). The prime recipients of such pitches - investors - are well versed in tuning them down and seeking the grain of truth within the hype.

Candidates, especially young or recent graduates, are not. If you, an exec, hone a pitch on a jaded 40-something VC manager with 20 years of industry experience, and then use it umodified on a 20-something candidate with 0-1 years of industry experience - you are not being truly fair and honest.

And yes, the candidate is likely to discover that a year later, feel cheated and abandon you. Tweet about him being a "flake" if that makes you feel good; the blame lies solely with you.