[matt-p]

Sure, agreed though a larger percentage of VC funded startups exit than you probably think. Those "90% fail" stats are made up mostly by people who got traditional angel investment or no investment at all.

I'm just saying there's two sides to the coin, that's all.

I think there's a very genuine element of 'show me how motivated you are' you also cannot expect to get a normal standard rate company salary when you own most of the equity and aren't profitable. I think it's reasonable on balance.

[menaerus]

No, that's only about the leverage - a perfect instrument to create even more pressure. Everything else I call a BS, sorry. Aren't founders already taking a huge leap by admitting themselves to work probably as much as ~10x more, with of course reciprocal amount of stress, and then you say it's reasonable that founders wouldn't be motivated enough unless they did all of that but for under the market rate? They left their job, they have the idea, they have the people, they have the drive ... and they want to execute it. I just hope not all investments work this way - this would be really sad.

[matt-p]

Pretty much all investments work this way. I'm not saying they are on the poverty line - let's say in the UK, standard rate for a great full time programmer or average tech lead is 100k, as a co-founder you'd be earning say 50k (pre profit). You can pay your bills, even go on vacation but yes, not market rate.

[menaerus]

I appreciate the details, I am not familiar with this at all. This is pretty shitty considering that as a contractor you would need to work ~3.5 months to earn 50k for much much less work and stress.

That makes me wonder what is the profile of a startup founder who agrees to an infinitely larger amount of complexity and stress for ~4x less income? The ones that got lucky so they don't care or don't have much loose or what. Crazy.