11–20 of 269 posts
The comp packages at big tech companies are becoming insane. In Seattle it's not unreasonable for a senior software engineer with some good connections to be making 200-250k. With that comes life insurance, health insurance for your whole family, disability insurance, etc. That's more in cash AND benefits than a doctor.
The owners of these companies are the wealthiest people in the world.
Why so low?
> Get rich quick in case of success. This is just betting. The probability of success is extremely low. Would be as wise as betting part of your salary each week in the lottery.
By BigCo standards, 10 engineers is a tiny startup. By venture/founder standards, I think 10 engineers is when you've already made it past the riskiest parts. You probably already have significant revenue traction, or you're past a Series A. You should be able to pay market, and equity is about alignment not risk compensation.
I think you can still get rich at a startup, but you need to take actual risk to be compensated for it. Join a 5 person company. Be the second or third engineer, and be able to become the CTO if the two technical people ahead of you leave.
Early stage hires at startups have the worst of both worlds: they face the downsides (lower wages, tons of risk, expectation to work long hours) but have muted upsides (small equity grant relative to founders, not even guaranteed to be hired in an acquihire situation). It is arguably even riskier than being a founder.
> That startup sold for 200 million dollars and, as the 10th engineer, I made ... 15000 dollars from that exit. Why so low?
Potentially it wasn't a successful exit? Dirty term sheet or multiple down rounds and $200m wasn't a successful exit?
> That startup sold for 200 million dollars and, as the 10th engineer, I made ... 15000 dollars from that exit. Why so low?
Versus a ballpark of a 10th engineer getting, say, 0.5%.
Even a few rounds of dilution can't explain a drop of two orders of magnitude.
I'm thinking the author either didn't pay attention or care or trusted too much in the initial offer, didn't stay long enough to vest most of it, didn't buy most of their options in the end, or all of the above?
> That startup sold for 200 million dollars and, as the 10th engineer, I made ... 15000 dollars from that exit. Why so low?
I think it was because I was an overseas employee and the founders just didn't shell out equity to people who were not based out of US. I saw the equity distribution sheet that was disclosed after the acquisition as part of legal requirements and that was indeed true.
IMO, equity represents ownership in the company and should not depend on purchase parity.
Early stage hires at startups have the worst of both worlds: they face the downsides (lower wages, tons of risk, expectation to work long hours) but have muted upsides (small equity grant relative to founders, not even guaranteed to be hired in an acquihire situation). It is arguably even riskier than being a founder.
Depends what the founder put in. Founder put in 100k? Or founder put in 12 months of unpaid work to build a MVP? He has a fair bit to lose on a splat.
Engineer #7? I suspect most developers can find a new job in 1-2 weeks, so the only thing "lost" is potential equity.