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

We're Shutting Down and I'm Scared

startupsanonymous.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–205 of 205 posts

Re: We're Shutting Down and I'm Scared

#201

Post by danbmil99 »

herdrick wrote: post #195
danbmil99 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only time a founder should forego salary is before anyone else has invested a dime. And in that case, the paperwork should specify that you are earning a salary but it is deferred, ie you are lending that money back to the company. Once a real investor enters the picture, if you can't pay yourself even a reduced salary (say 60% market rate), you're not raising enough money and/or you have a sucky investor. Add to…

I haven't seen anyone negotiate for unpaid back salary in a situation like that. Have you?

Typically, investors don't like it, and it tends not to be paid out in cash. However, I believe setting your books up that way gives you a better negotiating position when it comes to how low your salary will be, and possibly in relation to equity issues. It's a matter of having that sacrifice (no salary for X months) on paper so it can be respected as a real contribution with a concrete value, rather than just a giveaway that is somehow expected of a founder.

Re: We're Shutting Down and I'm Scared

#202

Post by 72deluxe »

MichaelGG wrote: post #188
72deluxe wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not yet 32 and I have worked for companies as an employee. Also, when I was utterly broke I did freelance work on the side and different languages and skills. It helped me get another job in fact! I think the important thing for me now is that at the end of the day I can go home and not really have to worry or think about work until tomorrow. If money was the most important thing in life (or I was deeply in debt…

I was hoping it'd be like that: "Clock out" and then forget about things. Except it's not, and I have dreams revolving around exactly how to solve a certain problem. Maybe if I became a lumberjack I could rest at night.

I find the drive home is the time to unwind for that. It isn't a long drive but I try and force myself to forget it. Of course, I might end up tinkering with stuff in the evening but I try and make it my own code, not works, to keep that separation. But mostly I will attempt to avoid computer "work".

I think if it gets too much I will become a gardener for the council and mow lawns. All that green is quite therapeutic, and you can see where you've been and where you've got to go on a lawn, so it is good.

Re: We're Shutting Down and I'm Scared

#203

Post by MortenK »

patio11 wrote: post #162
MortenK wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised that both you and tptacek seem to think it's much less of a deal to pay back vendors. Say the vendor is a startup or otherwise small company who's survival is hinged on getting paid what you owe. It's okay to stiff them, because we can get away with it legally? I think it's downright dishonorable to leave vendors hanging like that. Terminate your venture in time, before you can't afford to pay what you…

I'm in favor of paying one's debts, have a credit record which would do a Lannister proud, and would not incur any obligation which I did not have the good faith intention to repay as agreed. It's just that I feel an extra special obligation to employees, on account of their unique relationship to their employer, their (presumed) degree of dependence on that relationship, and a heritage as both a Catholic and a Japan…

A big question in this is what constitutes a vendor.

People who are experienced enough to price the risk into contracts, manage cashflow and not put all eggs into one basket won't get burned from a customers' insolvency.

But that comes from experience. Young people or the typical specialist such as a carpenter or electrician, are not necessarily this experienced in business.

In my view there's no line between such a vendor, and an individual who happens to be on the payroll. There might be legally, but they are equally entitled to payment for their work.

I'm sure neither you nor Thomas are ones to screw people over. But I think there's too much self-absolution of responsibility in startup circles, and your posts initially seemed to talk that point of view.

It boils down to being a decent person and stopping a venture before puting other people in financial jeopardy. Don't cry over the venture capitalists losses. But do make whole the people who have worked hard for you, whether employed or not.

Re: We're Shutting Down and I'm Scared

#205

Post by tjbiddle »

gte910h wrote: post #118
tjbiddle wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm mimicing tptacek's question here, but what type of corporation (Assuming this is in the US) wouldn't protect assets? Even an LLC with just one person operating it (Which the IRS still sees as a sole-proprietorship I believe) still has their personal assets covered.

Eh, sorta? You have to do a lot of things right to get that protection. many disregarded entities, don't http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/personal-liability-pi... : There is no real separation between the company and its owners. If the owners fail to maintain a formal legal separation between their business and their personal financial affairs, a court could find that the corporation or LLC is really just a sha…

Oh yeah, definitely. There shouldn't be any mix of assets. You need to keep them separate if you're trying to make the legal case that they're separate.
Post reply on HN