[tptacek]

I can't imagine that in any real company, employee shares would be "protected from dilution at all stages". It is, for what it's worth, largely not up to the founders; if they want a VC round, they're going to alter the structure of the company to suit the VC.

4% of a company that has been operating for 18 months is a huge stake.

[SamanthaG]

What do you mean by "operating"? You could well be right but there is no hackin or anything going on here, its more the founders going round looking for customers and creating relationships with strategic partners etc. There are no contracts signed yet, no shareholders invested yet. Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to discount in anyway what they have done, I am just trying to get to a situation where I can understand the best way to "value" what I am being offered a stake in, so I can compare what they are offering me against their stake.

[tptacek]

18 months of 50% effort at no salary = 9 months full time no salary. Why do you think a 21% gap is too high for that?

Again: 4% is a very large share for an employee. When the company comes to its senses, nobody else is going to get anything even in that neighborhood.

[boucher]

4% isn't in any way an unreasonable share for a first or second hire, especially when they're asking you to take no salary.

[tptacek]

I agree, it's not unreasonable. Just high.

[mrtron]

We hackers like to underestimate the amount of work involved in finding customers and creating relationships.

18 months of their efforts within their expertise is 18 months regardless of whether it is hacking :)

[SamanthaG]

Thanks, this is useful and gives me a better perspective.