51–60 of 89 posts
Also, isn't the founder generally the primary equity holder? If so how can equity holders and the founders interests be misaligned?
I've always heard that a founder's salary should be the amount that allows the founder to focus on the business. The concept of a super low salary seems to be focused on the 20 something single crowd. I have a family to support, so I can't take a super small salary and eat Top Ramen. This may be a subtle way that older founders are discriminated against. The story I've heard from founders who have families is that th…
Married founders, especially with children, must also maintain the support and good graces of their #1 lead investor - their spouse. And founders with spouses are less likely to be easily manipulated or bullied by investors. Another cause for investors to be less than thrilled with them.
Bad investors. Good investors will let good founders so their thing and support them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This post will be downvoted to hell, but I have been wanting to say this for a while and can't find a way to contact you. Actually, it's at +9 [ETA: changed during writing of reply] right now. [+12 as of 11.56 PST] The reason my posts tend to end up at the bottom is not (in general) downvoting or low karma scores. Of course, I've had some posts get downvoted, and a smaller number that deserved it. (Who hasn't?) The r…
I wonder if upvoting rankbanned people itself incurs a penalty...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Married founders, especially with children, must also maintain the support and good graces of their #1 lead investor - their spouse. And founders with spouses are less likely to be easily manipulated or bullied by investors. Another cause for investors to be less than thrilled with them.
> Another cause for investors to be less than thrilled with them. Bad investors. Good investors will let good founders so their thing and support them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I have a family to support, so I can't take a super small salary and eat Top Ramen. This may be a subtle way that older founders are discriminated against. This is not (harmful) discrimination. Ceteris paribus, people with financial obligations are less fit to found a startup.
They're also more motivated to succeed. I have a wife and two kids (both under 5) and a big mortgage. I pay myself barely enough for us to get by (the lowest salary that I've ever earned). The difference is made up in savings and my wife's occasional consulting work. I'm the lowest paid in the company. The cost of failure is so much higher, which simply means you're far more driven to succeed.
I've always heard that a founder's salary should be the amount that allows the founder to focus on the business. The concept of a super low salary seems to be focused on the 20 something single crowd. I have a family to support, so I can't take a super small salary and eat Top Ramen. This may be a subtle way that older founders are discriminated against. The story I've heard from founders who have families is that th…
> I have a family to support, so I can't take a super small salary and eat Top Ramen. This may be a subtle way that older founders are discriminated against. This is not (harmful) discrimination. Ceteris paribus, people with financial obligations are less fit to found a startup.
You've made a pretty extraordinary claim here; have you any evidence to back it up?
I've always heard that a founder's salary should be the amount that allows the founder to focus on the business. The concept of a super low salary seems to be focused on the 20 something single crowd. I have a family to support, so I can't take a super small salary and eat Top Ramen. This may be a subtle way that older founders are discriminated against. The story I've heard from founders who have families is that th…
From whose perspective? For you as a founder, certainly that makes sense (how else would you do it?), but requiring a higher salary is definitely a real disadvantage and your investors and cofounders are right to see it that way. It should surprise you not at all that having a high cost base limits your options and decreases your chances of success. For certain neutral-connotation definitions of "discrimination", that's a fine way to describe it, but it's hard to see why an investor would change their views there.
You can certainly argue that the extra experience you have from previous work makes up for that relative to a replacement candidate who can work for a ramen salary. I'm not completely convinced that's true in the general case; like you said, there are people your age (and presumably experience level) with war chests or breadwinning spouses. But it might be fine for you: "I'd like to make this deal worse for you (and, EV-wise, me) because I need to extract cash from the company, but I still think it's a good deal for you." There's nothing wrong with that, but be aware that's the argument you're making.
Here's data for Customer.io for comparison: * Currently based in NYC * Raised ~$700k. * Both of us founders are each @ $80k and have been the same with the exception of a couple of months at minimum wage. The goal with these salaries, was to be able to not think about money while working on the company. It kind of worked. 80k in NYC doesn't get you very far unless you're making huge lifestyle changes and not eating o…
wow