Re:Myths About Working as an Engineer at a Startup
by gaius on Thursday August 28, 2014 @02:42PM
(#8238947)
The salary cut you take to join a startup ought to be worth that much equity. If the founder has put in $50k of his own savings, and you take a $50k pay cut to join, then after 1 year you have "put in" as much capital as he has.
Re:Myths About Working as an Engineer at a Startup
by ulfw on Friday August 29, 2014 @06:49AM
(#8241942)
The founders usually put money in and don't get a salary. The early employees put nothing in, but get (a lower than market) salary. I am not saying the percentages are okay, but that's usually how it's rationalised.
Of course this doesn't apply to Silicon Valley bubble companies, where you might raise $1MM+ on day one, put zero money of your own in and pay yourself a salary as founder from Day one. Hard to argue then that you deserve a 30x equity differential from your first employees.
Re:Myths About Working as an Engineer at a Startup
by kasey_junk on Thursday August 28, 2014 @12:22PM
(#8238032)
Typically the founders don't have 65-80% of the company, some future investor does.
Re:Myths About Working as an Engineer at a Startup
by gkmoyn on Thursday August 28, 2014 @12:48PM
(#8238233)
I'm talking about the equity on day 1, not on exit day. But even on exit, the ratio is the same between founders and employees.
Re:Myths About Working as an Engineer at a Startup
by kasey_junk on Thursday August 28, 2014 @01:27PM
(#8238511)
Well depending on the legal setup, the company has 100% of it's equity on day 1. Founders and employees both are given options to buy said equity. That ratio is not setup with the expectation that the founders will have 60-85% of the equity in the future.
Re:Myths About Working as an Engineer at a Startup
by gkmoyn on Thursday August 28, 2014 @02:48PM
(#8238970)
Sorry, my original point must have been very unclear.
In a typical startup, the ratio of equity between founder and employee #1 might be 50:1 or even much more. I am always surprised that people sign up to be employees given how fast equity grants drop for every subsequent hire. And, I wonder if any company has tried more gradual equity drop-offs. For example, where the ratio between founder and early employee grants is < 2:1, for example.
Why do people sign up for such lopsided payoffs?
Has any company tried a more gradual equity falloff? Say, with two founders and two employees, instead of an equity distribution of: F1=34 F2=32 E1=1 E2=1 you might have: F1=20 F2=19 E1=15 E2=14