Not worthless but the deal they get is usually a lot worse than the deal a VC gets.
Are they getting paid enough to account for the risk? A VC will make more money and have less risk (overall). An employee will most likely make not much more than working for an established company and have a high chance of losing his job within a few years.
Even if successful you have a good chance of losing your job or being forced to move to fully vest your options after a buyout.
Chances are low you will be there or your job will in 5 years
Re:Startups Rejecting Venture Capital
by jonathankoren on Friday January 11, 2019 @12:44PM
(#18885214)
Exactly. The idea that Founders take on so much more ”risk” than early employees, and so deserve multiple orders of magnitude more reward is laughable.
There’s no difference in the risk of a founder and employee 1. They’re both out of a job and perhaps underpaid at first.
Re:Startups Rejecting Venture Capital
by eanzenberg on Friday January 11, 2019 @01:04PM
(#18885407)
Do you consider the value add of a founder and 1st employee the same?
> What does that mean for startup employees? Well, they got the worst of all worlds. High risk and little to no upside. Their eggs are also in one basket as they work for only one company AND they don't have the huge upsides that VCs and founders have
Presumably both of them get paid for their efforts...not entirely worthless