It's fascinating how in the recruitment process, hiring managers who expect potential hires to act logically and methodically all but demand the recruit to suspend his or her logic and mental methods when considering their personal financial interests.
The dichotomy would be humorous if it weren't so sad.
I care about the mission. In fact, I care about the mission so much that I know that it'll do the company a disservice to train me and lose me a year later to another company with a similar mission offering me more money. Therefore, it's in the company's interest to pay me a competitive salary!
Dwight Schrute said it best: “Would I ever leave this company? Look, I’m all about loyalty. In fact, I feel like part of what I’m being paid for here is my loyalty. But if there were somewhere else that valued loyalty more highly… I’m going wherever they value loyalty the most.”
The best startup CEOs I know overpay their key people BC they know that losing their best people hurts so much more than the same people helping whatever company they might join next
So it sounds like they're paying over market, but not overpaying—they recognize the cost of these people leaving and provide a salary that takes said cost into account.
Yes! Entering the job market I was offered x amount of stock. I had no way to know what this was worth and essentially asked my manager who said "you should feel good about this amount". He was honest and fair but the fact is that most places are trying to hire bright people and they offer x amount of stock without providing how much stock is out there. Here's a # that we know is meaningless to you, do you accept? What a crazy norm we've accepted!
Any company which won't clearly explain the last share price for you stock and your strike price is trying to pull a fast one. Without that information, it's worth $0.
The dichotomy would be humorous if it weren't so sad.