News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Founder Dilution - How Much Is "Normal?" by mtkd on Saturday February 21, 2009 @11:58AM (#489908)
Percentages are irrelevant, once you've lost controlling share it doesn't matter if you have 49% or 4.9% - as 4.9% of something > 49% of nothing.
Re:Founder Dilution - How Much Is "Normal?" by brk on Saturday February 21, 2009 @12:15PM (#489916)
This is not really true, but it seems to be a common thought here.

VCs are investing in the whole package of founder+product/idea. VCs, like any other investor, are inherently lazy in that they would much rather that somebody else do all the work while they make all the money.

If you maintain 49%, or even less, of a percentage you would generally only need 1 other board member to be on your side to "maintain control". No board or investor WANTS to go through the turmoil of replacing or fighting with the founders. If they did feel that way, they would likely not invest in the first place.

When the company does finally get to the point that the stock has some real exercisable value, you will wish you had 49% instead of 4.9%, given the opportunity.

Re:Founder Dilution - How Much Is "Normal?" by gjm11 on Saturday February 21, 2009 @12:10PM (#489912)
Since the percentage you own is also the percentage you can sell later, it certainly isn't irrelevant.
Re:Founder Dilution - How Much Is "Normal?" by mtkd on Saturday February 21, 2009 @01:19PM (#489944)
So you'd rather have 49% of a dangerously under funded company than 4.9% of a well funded company?

If you sell equity for investment in to the business the total value of your shareholding has not reduced, but the company is more able to proceed.

Too many shareholders blindly cling to equity for the sake of keeping a high percentage - when the business would benefit from further investment.

Re:Founder Dilution - How Much Is "Normal?" by tptacek on Saturday February 21, 2009 @02:16PM (#489989)
Meh. Most companies are "dangerously underfunded" until they're cash flow positive.