
“A tale of lies and deceit” – GrabGas CTO let go by founders - visakanv
http://julianee.com/a-tale-of-lies-and-deceit-my-experience-on-how-grabgas-screwed-me-over/
======
yllow
It's just that you are unlucky to bump into pyshopaths. They suck up your
energy slowly until you are too late to realize. It's a lesson that everyone
should be aware of. I'm glad that you jumped the boat quickly.

------
bsbechtel
If the author's reading this, it sounds like you're fairly early in your
career and learned a tough business lesson the hard way. Not to downplay what
went down, but take solace in the fact that you have a set of hard skills that
will earn you lots of money over the course of your career; the others in the
story obviously don't have this. The best way to get revenge when you're
screwed over by someone is to keep pushing forward and accomplish greater
things than what you lost. If you want to be a successful entrepreneur, this
attitude is almost a requirement considering the endless setbacks you'll face.
Best of luck going forward!

------
caretStick
People talking about getting ink need to focus a little more on the underlying
issue, the gas-lighting of greedy "founders". My employment contract & bonus
contract had to all be walked out on as it was all predicated on my CEO being
trustworthy. I recently met up with several other employees who didn't get
paid for the end of their contracts either. The thing we liked most about
talking was figuring out it definitely wasn't our problem.

> If the author's reading this, it sounds like you're fairly early in your
> career and learned a tough business lesson the hard way

Yeah. Second that. Experience is good. Knowing what it all actually looks
like, the phrases, the mannerisms, is very valuable. You can take bigger risks
when you know how the terrain rolls.

As an example of my senses getting more developed, recently I talked to a
"CEO" of some startup I was interviewing and asked about someone else I liked
who I knew at the company from earlier. Check this out:

"Oh, yeah [person] is really great...blah blah blah."

"So how is [person] doing?"

"Oh, well, they decided they wanted to do something else...blah blah blah."

Complete total waste of time was brewing if I didn't probe into the non-
specific answer that artfully implied that [person] hadn't left the company
and was soon part of my awesome team. I would have at the least researched
them more. When you have to waste time on things like this, it makes getting
where you want to be way harder and makes it harder to justify risks.

~~~
MrDresden
"My employment contract & bonus contract had to all be walked out on as it was
all predicated on my CEO being trustworthy." In what way was it predicated on
your CEO? A CEO can't simply decide to not honour a written and signed legal
document, without risking a court case (the onus is on you to go after what is
rightfully yours).

Learning to navigate human interaction in business (and make no mistake, a
employee/employer relationship is a business transaction) is a skill needed in
any industry. These kinds of things are not new, in this industry or any
other.

~~~
lazyconfab
Unless you have a large pot of money to spend on litigation (or the amount of
the contract falls inside the limit for small claims), all contracts amount to
trust. The cost of fighting a legal battle is enormous, and mid-sized to large
businesses can fight battles of attrition in court.

~~~
hga
Indeed, unless substantial amounts of money from a client who can pay are
involved (think Brian Reid (!) who was let go from Google 9 days before their
IPO because he was too old:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Reid_(computer_scientist...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Reid_\(computer_scientist\)#Google)
), contracts only serve to memorialize decision and promises, they help avoid
"but I thought you meant X" retrospective flaky human memory.

~~~
Hydraulix989
Settled out of court for undisclosed terms? Sounds like Reid really made out
well then?

~~~
hga
That's my impression.

The optics were _horrible_ , it sounds like he had a fairly strong case, and
for those of us who knew of him starting from his works like Scribe way way
back when, well, we're inclined to believe his story.

All we _know_ is that Google made an offer he and his lawyer chose not to
refuse, but as long as they thought they were going to win in court before a
jury and all that, it had to have been generous, although I'd imagine it
wasn't as generous as his original ability to to participate in the IPO and
beyond.

------
gtlondon
Rule #1 of freelancing: If there's anything you definitely want (i.e. money)
then always get it in writing beforehand.

Some people will make it deliberately hard for you to get things in writing -
these people are looking to screw you over.

If you are a nice guy it's sometimes hard to understand that other (usually
more wealthy) people would exploit you. However, the sad fact is some people's
default position is to try and exploit others.

On the plus side, sounds like you have some real skills, just needs to be more
formal when selling them.

------
TheMagicHorsey
Never ever trust non technical founders. They usually don't have as highly
marketable skills as you do. They live by fleecing programmers for the most
part. The few that are worth something will be honest because they have
marketable skills. The rest are hucksters and snake oil salesmen. They are
good at seducing naive people into working for free. Then they steal your
labor.

Always get your deals in paper, up front.

These guys will not succeed in the long run.

By the way, if you did not sign an employment agreement, you as the author own
all the software. They don't. You can sue them for using your software. That's
the case in the US.

------
runako
TL;DR: Always have a written employment agreement before beginning work.

~~~
samfisher83
Not under US law. I am guessing this wasn't the US. Oral contract is still
binding. Given there is evidence he did the work for no money a judge could
reasonably determine that he did agree to equity compensation.

~~~
runako
What rayiner said, plus I will point out that the other major point of written
contracts is to force a "meeting of the minds." Basically, when someone offers
you "significant equity" did they mean 1% or 10%? Is there vesting? On what
schedule?

Without this and other critical information in writing, there is a huge chance
you have totally different understandings of what the other party had in mind.
This isn't to say they are trying to screw you, simply that there are ranges
of "normal" for all of the important bits usually governed by an employment
contract. If you don't have it in writing, your best hope is that yet another
party (a judge) will impose her understanding of the terms. Not what you want.

------
scient
Sooo he did not talk terms, he did not sign anything, and now he is
complaining? Sad to break it to you buddy, but the real world is not fair
game, and you got played.

~~~
UK-AL
I think a lot of the small startups, if you start talking legal, signing
things, creating contracts etc will get scared or annoyed that your taking
control.

Maybe that's a sign not to join though.

~~~
balabaster
A lot of them _do_ get this way, and it _is_ a sign not to join.

Unfortunately, when enough people wriggle, the founders get their act together
and stop behaving that way when they really know they need someone and can't
do it alone... by which time, they get someone else that didn't have to fight
to get things done right and you missed out because the timing was wrong. So
it's a bit of a double edged sword in that respect.

------
robertcorey
If someone burned me for 4 months of my life I would definitely publicly out
them. First off it's important to warn other developers to be cautious when
working with them in the future, and second because I'd be upset and want to
hurt them .

------
throwanem
The world is often not kind to people who readily trust others. It's a tough
lesson to have to learn. I'm glad to see that this author seems to be dealing
with it fairly well.

I understand why he chose to take his side public, too, and I think he's right
to have done so. Maybe it'll help someone else avoid getting owned the same
way. Maybe, too, it'll encourage the guys who dealt with him in bad faith to
behave somewhat more circumspectly next time, lest they further impair their
already blemished reputations.

------
mangeletti
I would like to digress for a moment.

When I read things like the TL;DR of that article I get the feeling the tech
industry is full of entitled children who are playing imaginary. No product,
no orders, no revenue, no resources... isn't that usually just called no
company?

Why do tech "startups" delude themselves into thinking that a group of guys
and/or gals is something other than a group of guys and/or gals?

Can you imagine going down to your local shopping plaza, and there is this guy
standing outside of an empty building, holding a big cardboard sign that
reads:

    
    
        This behind me is supposed to
        be my store. It's supposed to
        have groceries and other stuff.
        But, we don't have any money
        or customers, or a store, or
        any groceries. We have a name
        though... and a logo :)
    

You probably can't imagine seeing that, because that person would be entirely
delusional.

~~~
harryh
All companies, even modest shops in plazas, start as just an idea on someone's
head. Some people who have these ideas are delusional and go on to create
nothing. But some of them go on to create successful businesses. A few go on
to create giant corporations.

There's little harm in indulging people's fantasies a bit. Especially when
some of those fantasies will turn into reality. One of the magical things
about Silicon Valley is how open people are to this idea. In most other places
in the world people's dreams get crushed by cynicism before they ever have a
chance to take root.

------
z3t4
Only comfort might be that assholes like this never gets anywhere in life
because noone wants to work with them. Sure they got $25k from a acceleration
program and $15k from an early investor. But they will burn through that in
less then a month. And now they have no product, just an idea, so they own
100% of nothing.

------
forgottenacc56
Tech guy sounds naive plus responsible for the outcomes and maybe should just
accept lesson learned.

~~~
RodericDay
I'll never understand the callousness some techies have for the less business-
savvy of their own kind.

Any time a head-to-desk, business-null developer gets exploited, they say
"just desserts", not realizing it weakens the bargaining position of
developers as a whole.

Really sad imo.

~~~
balabaster
> Any time a head-to-desk, business-null developer gets exploited, they say
> "just desserts"

This behaviour from anyone is just a really big black stain on humanity. It's
one thing to leverage someone else's work for the gain of all, it's entirely
another to totally exploit their good nature and hang them out to dry while
you take all the benefit. Business is supposed to be a win-win-win situation
not a win-but-screw-everyone-else-over-in-the-process situation.

While I can see that the author was incredibly naive, I can totally understand
his naivete, having been burned like this myself in my earlier years. Being
burned like this obliterates any trust you have for working with founders on
future startups and makes for a potentially toxic working relationship in any
similar situation.

Also, I think people's opinions of situations like this really lets their true
colors shine through. Those who are victim blaming and shaming the author by
pointing out the lack of apparent contract or that he should have known better
are really just justifying the abhorrent behavior of the founders who have
totally exploited someone else for their own material gain. The personality
trait that lets you treat other people like that is sociopathic. Shame on
them.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Sure. But naieve? Worked for weeks on the project, but only talked about
ownership for what, 3 seconds? That was galactically bad due diligence. Had
they asked anybody for advice, that advice would have universally been "You're
being played; get something on paper!"

~~~
caminante
Also, this is HIS side of the story. At that, it doesn't come off favorably.

------
dboreham
I've seen similar scenarios play out for a few of my friends early in their
careers. Those experiences made me wonder why there isn't a class in college
(or even High School) where students are taught the basics of business deals.
I think many people are given a false sense of security due to employment law
which does give some fairly strong guarantees about things like being paid for
work. In a B2B deal none of this exists -- there is no "payment police" and no
default law giving you rights you might reasonably expect. Employment law
covers most of the friends/family a young person comes into contact with
leading to an implicit assumption that the same kind of rules apply to
business. Someone, at some point in their education, should stand up and yell
that it ain't so.

I was lucky to have several mentors who had started their own businesses and I
also got to learn from my friends' mistakes.

------
valdiorn
Never work without a written contract. Doesn't matter if it's tech or flipping
burgers. Do not assume you will get paid without a contract, ever. Definitely
don't assume a group of people will you a large chunk of their company if they
don't legally have to.

------
Hydraulix989
Another perspective:

"CTO quits startup, takes tech with him after team ‘screwed him over"

[https://www.techinasia.com/cto-quits-startup-takes-tech-
team...](https://www.techinasia.com/cto-quits-startup-takes-tech-team-screwed)

I saw the TechInAsia article with quite a contrasting headline (I'm pretty
sure the TIA article was even posted here, but now I'm not seeing it appear in
the search results anymore -- was it removed?).

What do you think? Was he "let go" or did he "quit" himself? Did others leave
at the same time? Were they engineers? Any ideas?

------
desireco42
First sorry you got screwed.

You are not first tech guy who got screwed over. While you should have
something more concrete before you worked for them, this doesn't excuse them.
They scammed you.

For some reason, and we can discuss why this might be, tech work is treated as
something we need to give away for free and after it, often we don't get a
respect that we deserve. This happens in situations where tech guy is key to
success, happens in companies where you are one of the employees and part of
the team.

The more you charge or ask for your services, the better you will be treated.
Let that be lesson to all.

------
smoyer
You rarely here both sides of a story like this but I've had a few occasions
where I was a passive observer. Everyone always writes about "getting screwed"
but nobody ever writes about "doing the screwing". Carnegie, Rochefeller and
Pullman weren't bashful about parading their successful plundering - and where
are the universities and museums?

But from what I've observed, the other side will usually tell you how they
"got screwed" too. I'll bet the other perspective puts the blame on this
article's writer.

------
dudul
Sorry for the author. I think we've all been burnt like that to various
degrees, and hopefully, we all learn the lesson: if it's not written down and
signed, it doesn't exist.

------
steaminghacker
it's easy to say that anyone should have had a written agreement in such
circumstances, but the first 4 months of any start up are likely to be hectic
and there's no time to take out for this kind of thing. Especially when you
think you're working with your "friends".

Nevertheless, a very clear verbal agreement should have been made. I know this
cant be enforced without proof, but it does mean than those involved know the
counter-parties also know what they agreed to. it makes things harder to deny.

The reason being that, it would be madness to betray each other, just as
things start to work. A thing started is far from finished, and they will need
everyone and more.

Most important of all, it would seem the tech guy legally owns what he has
built, in the absence of a proper agreement. Even with a backup copy of this
tech, the remaining people aren't likely to be able to extend it easily.

The tech guy should consider forming his own startup with the tech he has
made.

------
ebarock
I understand his frustration. I'm not saying that I agree with the whole
misleading or misunderstanding that may have happened.

Unfortunately we don't live more in a society that keeps their promise, word
and honor. So, having everything written is a great way to protect yourself
and others.

But this is a good lesson to learn: what is not written, does not exist.

------
nicolas_t
Was the author naive? Yes, we all go through there but the rule always
applies, always have a contract.

That said, I don't really understand people here that criticize him. Per the
screenshot they called him a shareholder. That word has a clear meaning and
they clearly screwed him over. I think he was right to walk away with his
tech.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
The next sentence after "You want to be a shareholder?" is "What percentage
are we talking about here?" followed by "When will the paperwork arrive?
That's when I can start contributing." That conversation failed to happen (for
weeks). There's some responsibility for the meltdown shared by both parties
here.

~~~
nicolas_t
Oh, I completely agree. He was naive and he has some responsibility for the
issue but they were clearly dishonest while he was only naive.

Even if there's responsibility to be shared and good lessons to be learned by
new developers reading this, it doesn't stop the fact that he was not the
dishonest party in this.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
That's a supposition made on very small evidence. They offered him employment
with shares - one interpretation of the ambiguous offer. To suppose they meant
anything more is pure conjecture.

~~~
nicolas_t
We do have the screenshot he provided of the facebook conversation which is
pretty damning and very clear. Employment with equity != shareholder in any
well used definition of the word shareholder.

So, as long as we assume that the OP didn't falsify the Facebook screenshot,
it's not small evidence.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Still nothing concrete - to be called a 'shareholder' is not terribly
meaningful, is it? Terms like "honorary co-founder" are meaningless.

I don't hold them harmless - it was not right to let the ambiguity go on so
long. But s/he was complicit in that.

------
MrDresden
As many others have pointed out in the comments; Never, EVER, do work without
a written contract listing everything. Does nit matter if the people you
perform that work for are friends or family. If money is, or might become,
involved you need a contract.

Live and learn.

------
yitchelle
One thing I don't get. I have only read the TLDR so the answer may be in the
full text. Even in this summary, there are many instances where lies were
pandered to the public and to the press. Shouldn't ths have raise some serious
alarms bells?

~~~
UK-AL
Fairly standard occurrence in the startup world tbh. Desperate startups
wanting to get press attention will exaggerate or make up stories.

Media doesn't care, because they get a nice story to print.

~~~
yitchelle
That woudl really suck if this ever becomes the normal behaviour. How could
you ever have any trust in your co-workers/boss/team? Sometimes, these
relationships need to be tighter than marriage.

------
troels
It sounds like he could reasonably dispute any company assets, at least up
until the formation date. Ownership of the code would seem to be either shared
or fully belong to the tech guy. How about he have a lawyer write up a formal
claim against the company and then do nothing else until they raise money.
Then sue.

~~~
BrandonM
He already took the code. It was definitely his since there was no formal
agreement in place for assignment of IP. The company's domain
([http://grabgas.com](http://grabgas.com)) just points to their Facebook page
now.

------
grayhamster
I think accusing the tech guy of naivete is like blaming a rape victim for
dressing sexily.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Except this is business. With its own rules. Let the Buyer Beware

~~~
croon
Bull. Just because you CAN exploit someone doesn't mean you have to. At least
it backfired on them by losing their tech.

------
alabamamike
Sounds like these founders were playing GrabAss ...

