[jedberg]

Overall I really like this -- I think it makes a ton of sense for a startup, where the expectation is that most of the hires will contribute equally. You might end up having senior people self select out for the "low" comp, but others won't care because they believe the equity will make up the difference.

But I take issue with this part:

> As for how equity is determined, it really deserves its own in-depth treatment, but in short, equity compensates for risk – and in a startup, risk reduces over time: the first employee takes much more risk than the hundredth.

I don't think it's correct. Someone who joins with 25 years of experience is taking a lot more risk than someone who joins with 5 years of experience. The first person is most likely on their last job or close to it -- they don't have a lot of runway left to "take another chance". The person early in their career will have many chances to take new risks.

OP didn't get into it, but I hope they consider that when the look at the equity part of compensation.