| > and I've turned down a number that would have made me retirement wealthy based on precisely that logic. How many have you turned down that would have yielded zero? > Quitting a six-figure job, forgoing income for a year-plus, taking the risks of never getting liftoff or financing, taking another year or more at way-below-market angel-funded salary... Absent forgoing income entirely, most seed-stage employees take the same amount of risk. > you're getting all of the career and relationship equity of having been a key player on a huge success. The problem is that every founder is selling this vision to early hires, but joining a seed-stage company is almost always too early to determine whether you're joining a huge success or a company that will flame out in any of a hundred ways. > I would argue that early-stage roles, if you can tolerate the opportunity cost over the near term, are one of the better deals going I would argue that early-stage roles at companies that become successful are one of the better deals going. > and likely (though only arguably) better than being an under-ready founder with a high likelihood of failure. In my experience being a founder is a much better teacher than being an under-ready early-stage employee. Being responsible for the success of the company provides opportunities for growth like nothing else. |
This is an important discussion, and my comments shouldn't be interpreted to mean I don't think joining an early-stage company is risky. It is! But it is easy to be too conservative with the OP's logic, and not everyone is ready to be a founder, so I think it's a great spot for people who have some risk tolerance but still want to build learnings and networks, and it has potential to turn out well financially too. And, you get a lot more opportunity to see data before you join, and to leave early, if it's not going anywhere.
To answer your question, I have turned down my share startup deals that would have had no stock upside, and accepted a few too. But I've also turned down a number of opportunities that clearly had breakout potential, and in aggregate, if measuring strictly by wealth creation potential, I believe I sub-optimized by not taking more of the startup gigs that were offered to me. (There were other personal reasons for these decisions too, which offset those outcomes.)
YMMV!