Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

If founders treated their investors the same way they treated their employees

software.rajivprab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–278 of 278 posts

Re: If founders treated their investors the same way they treated their employees

#271

Post by elwell »

kristopolous wrote: post #40
elwell wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like the simplicity of your homepage.

I stopped feeling obligated to being fancy a couple years ago. It's running off a raspberry pi at my apartment and is really more about giving me access to my network of computing resources here. I've been meaning to make a generative poetry engine and just put it there without disclosing it. It could probably be pretty believably human if it's restricted enough.

You're reminding me of good memories. I made a (pretty bad) rhyming poem generator in middle school. Whimsical coding is a most enjoyable form.

Re: If founders treated their investors the same way they treated their employees

#272

Post by brogrammernot »

justinclift wrote: post #145
brogrammernot wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much money do you actually need though? I’ve worked for 5 startups now and my equity payout has been 0, 0, 0, 0, and now I stand I make low 7 figures from the equity on this last company (publicly traded now). During those startups the following happened: - I saw my nieces and nephews so little they forgot my name. They were young, sure, but it still stung when they look at you like a stranger - Messed up a 8+ ye…

> ... now I stand I make low 7 figures from the equity on this last company (publicly traded now). Isn't that a "never need to work again" situation though? eg, you've effectively freed up your future to put time into whatever you want?

Other folks already chimed in, but yeah $1-3M depending on how everything ends up.

After taxes and everything, it’s not “enough” to never need to work again but yes, I would say I’m very fortunate to not have money as the concern as long as I’m not irresponsible with it.

The point was more that it easily could’ve been another $0 and in theory, the company could fail taking that $1-3M down considerably.

The salary most HNers make is way above the median and is enough to live a very comfortable life. I honestly can’t tell you if the money was worth the personal pain of the last 10 or so years, truly I don’t think it is.

Re: If founders treated their investors the same way they treated their employees

#273

Post by rexreed »

Shorel wrote: post #270
rexreed wrote: post #210

The oft-cited quote is that it's very, very, very rare to make money working as an employee at a Startup. The farther you are away from the founding team, the harder it is. And 99 times out of a 100 even the founding team doesn't make anything, if there's an upside exit at all. If you want to work at a startup as a non-founder employee, go into it knowing that you're taking the risk and getting little of the potentia…

Your last sentence is key. I think it was a way of financing enterprises some centuries ago. Why is it no longer accepted?

Yes it's a curiosity.

I mean it makes sense. Let's say your salary would be $120k plus $30k in stock. Rather than giving you stock as options, you could just be given that stock as equivalent value (subject to a vesting schedule) and on the same terms of the Seed Round. No money out of pocket... am I missing something?

Re: If founders treated their investors the same way they treated their employees

#274

Post by GFischer »

ping_pong wrote: post #115
lkbm wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Main reason: it's more fun. I could be a cog in a giant corporate machine, or I can have a measurable impact where I work. I can stay in my lane and do my specific job tasks, or I can run around putting out fires and helping wherever help is needed. I mindlessly build the specific design product handed me, or I can guide my own work in accordance to the needs of our customers and the business. I can follow policy and…

It's a lot of fun until the company gets acquired and you get $80k for your 4 years of hard work, and the founders get $50M. Source: happened to me with a YC startup.

80k is a lot of money, but this must suck, especially if you feel like you were an integral part of the company's succcess - some German researchers found that compensation perception is more on "fairness" than the actual numbers, if you'd made 80k and the founders 200k, maybe you'd have been OK with it.

Re: If founders treated their investors the same way they treated their employees

#275

Post by Peaches4Rent »

GFischer wrote: post #274
ping_pong wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a lot of fun until the company gets acquired and you get $80k for your 4 years of hard work, and the founders get $50M. Source: happened to me with a YC startup.

80k is a lot of money, but this must suck, especially if you feel like you were an integral part of the company's succcess - some German researchers found that compensation perception is more on "fairness" than the actual numbers, if you'd made 80k and the founders 200k, maybe you'd have been OK with it.

I know research is good, but you really don't need research to figure that out. You don't want to feel screwed over

Re: If founders treated their investors the same way they treated their employees

#276

Post by acjohnson55 »

brailsafe wrote: post #254
filleduchaos wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think that point can support working for either a big company or a small company depending on what type of impact you are looking for. For a lot of people, "I want to have an impact where I work" is more about their own ego and sense of importance than about impact on other people's lives. This is not a value judgment, by the way - wanting to feel like more than just another faceless disposable drone is a valid d…

I'd argue that people conflate "having an impact" with "creating a product" rather than "having an impact" with having visible prestige. I used to think the former, but not after having experience interacting with people who want to be middle managers of middle managers. Those people want power and mostly don't care about impacting anything outside revenue increases that can be easily tied back to their name.

I would suggest that you've had experiences with bad middle managers. I say this all the time, but I only began to appreciate middle management when I became a front-line manager. An effective middle manager makes a whole boat full of people feel secure and strategically focused. They figure out how to leverage the strengths of their front-line managers and senior-level ICs, and how to fill in gaps. They know how to manage upward towards the executive layer, to acquire resources and summarize a great deal of complexity.

Re: If founders treated their investors the same way they treated their employees

#277

Post by TedShiller »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #260
TedShiller wrote: post #251

Well, employees are not investors, even if the author is implying that they should be the same, or should be treated the same. Employment contracts are at-will, nobody is forced to agree to compensation. Of course, if the compensation is horrendously unfair, the top talent will not accept it.

> Employment contracts are at-will, nobody is forced What is the point you are making here, other than stating the obvious? It's the same for investment, what am I missing?

The point was that it's a free market, like it or not. Companies won't treat investors the same as employees. They never have. If they do, let me know.

Re: If founders treated their investors the same way they treated their employees

#278

Post by jason0597 »

wikibob wrote: post #258
phone8675309 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Low 7 figures to me would be between $1,000,000 and $3,000,000. I don't think that I would call that "never need to work again" money. It's between 10 and 30 years of my salary. A good lump sum to stash in the retirement fund. Maybe retire at 55 instead of 65, but definitely not "never need to work again" money.

You make $100,000 per year? If you are in the USA you are deeply underpaid.

I don't know whether I should laugh or cry at this comment...
Post reply on HN