[throwaway93192]

True, one option for everyone who thinks equity distribution is out of whack, is to start their own company. They can then create an imbalance in their own favor, allocating the lion's share for themselves. Then they can work to convince eager candidates to join their noble mission in exchange for a (razor-thin, shhh) piece of the pie.

Another route would be for founders to expand option pools from the typical 8-12%, so that their own holding didn't exceed that of every employee combined. But of course, why would any founder choose to do that? It's hard to become a billionaire if you let your employees have too much!

[murukesh_s]

That's not always true. It may look easy to start a company and make it at least a moderate success in Silicon Valley today, perhaps due to the easy availability of money and helping mentality from peer companies who would jump into trying your product and even paying for that because they themselves got easy money from cash rich, aggressive investors.

But it is not the case in traditional markets other countries where you have to put lot of time, effort, our own money and mental stress into creating even a moderately successful business.. On the other hand employees get relatively less strain and a stable income and an option to leave the company anytime and move to better higher paying jobs.

[imbur]

If you start your own company you can distribute equity as you see fit