
Ask HN: How do I choose between a job offer from Google and a promising startup? - siatsfu
I believe in what the startup does but they are at very early stages and the salary they offer is 1&#x2F;3 of what Google offers but I get about 6% options over 4 years.
======
kcorbitt
I was faced with a similar choice two years ago and went with Google. I really
didn't enjoy my time there; turns out big companies really aren't my cup of
tea. I also learned much less than I would have somewhere else because
Google's stack is quite proprietary and I simply wasn't motivated in that
environment. I quit after only 8 months.

So it may surprise you that I'd recommend taking the Google offer! In my mind,
there's no way to lose choosing Google. If it turns out that you love Google,
awesome – you can have a great and well-compensated career there. And if it
turns out you don't enjoy that kind of shop (like me), your career
possibilities will be far wider after a tour of duty at Google than they are
right now, including within startups. Google as a resume item will continue
paying dividends for as long as it maintains its reputation for engineering
excellence.

This advice is based on my personal experience – it's almost certain that I
wouldn't be in my current role if I hadn't had Google on my resume when I
applied. And my current responsibilities, experience and income far exceed
what I could have expected on the alternative trajectory at an early-stage
startup, unless its growth happened to have exploded while I was there.

~~~
Hydraulix989
Did you have to return any signing bonuses, relocation, etc in full?

~~~
kcorbitt
I had to return a prorated portion of my signing bonus and relocation
expenses. The larger financial hit was that none of my RSUs had vested, so I
walked away from those entirely (my understanding is that Google has since
changed their policy and RSUs now begin vesting immediately).

To be clear, I don't recommend that anyone join Google with the intention of
leaving in less than a year. Even though I wasn't particularly enjoying
myself, I was planning on staying for ~18 months to pay back Google's
investment in my training. In the end though I changed my mind and left
earlier because an opportunity came up that was simply too good to refuse.

~~~
joshuamorton
This is correct. You'll still repost prorated signing and relo, but some of
your stock will have vested.

~~~
Hydraulix989
Surprised there is no one-year cliff now.

Also did you have to return the pre-tax amounts or the post-tax amounts?

~~~
joshuamorton
I stayed beyond one year, so idk. But I'd expect pre-tax.

Obviously you wouldn't pay tax on the amount you return, so it's not really an
important distinction.

~~~
Hydraulix989
Typically, the company withholds the tax for you though. I've heard stories of
companies demanding the pre-tax amounts even though THEY "paid" your tax
already by withholding it.

~~~
joshuamorton
That makes sense to me. The company can't unpay your taxes for you, you need
to do that (and there are many options to do that, which vary from underpaying
your next estimated taxes[1] to just waiting for a larger than normal refund).

And if I recall, if your income increases a significant amount, you aren't
penalized for underpaying estimated taxes, so there's ways to "protect"
yourself (and also to not overpay).

But making your taxes correct is your responsibility, not your employers. Why
would your company reimburse you for taxes that you don't owe?

[1]: For example, when I was interning, the "trick" was to set yourself as
having some large number of dependents in the payroll tool. The tools assumed
a year long employment, but as a fixed-term employee, you would owe
significantly fewer taxes than the estimation. Careful massaging of the number
of dependents was a knob you could turn to make your estimated taxes more in
line with your actual taxes. This was, according to people I asked, legal as
long as it wasn't being done fraudulently.

------
bb88
1\. 6% of zero is zero.

2\. 4 years is a lot of time to spend at a company for a high probability of
making 6% of zero.

3\. If you're an employee at a startup, you're in the wrong job. You're much
better off being a founder.

4\. Equity is a way to be paid less and to be fired in the first year if you
haven't vested anything.

5\. Who are you going to sell your equity shares to? It's not necessarily a
free market in the startup world.

6\. Big companies aren't just the only type of company to be soulless. Wait
till you see a small company try to screw it's employees out of equity.

~~~
liquidise
This is a surprisingly jaded response that flies in the face of my experiences
at multiple startups.

I concur with assuming equity will be 0. Dilution is real and almost all
startups fold. Counting on equity is unwise and dangerous.

As for the rest of your commentary, I’d say startups are great because you get
a better ability to shape your experience. I’ve now been employee: 21, 7, and
1 at respective startups. While I’ve seen poor management, I’ve not seen evil
management.

As for opportunities, they are what you make them to be. There is always room
for leadership at small startups, for instance. If that is a path the OP cares
about, it is an intruiging option.

All that said, at 3x the salary google is hard to say no to even over a 1-2
year span.

~~~
bb88
I made a long post, whined a bunch and deleted it. But I do agree with you
sentiment about equity.

I do believe if VC's really believed that they were making the world a better
place, they would insist that employees shared in the wealth that was being
created.

On one hand, the Valley is an amazing economic engine, on the other, it's an
amazing place of inequality where people making $70k can't afford to live
there. If that's the future, the Valley needs to do better, rather than
insisting that people need to live in houses smaller than shipping containers.

------
pbiggar
Disclaimer: I'm a founder of an early stage startup, so I'm biased.

You need to figure out what your goals are. We can't answer for you because we
don't know what you want.

If your goal is just money (which is fine, don't be afraid to say this), then
definitely go to google. In 10 years you'll be earning 500k per year, and have
put away a ton of cash too. Financially, if the startup is successful
you_might_ make $10m, but that's unlikely. At google you can guarantee you
make $1m.

There are some good reasons to choose a startup:

1) you want the work environment of the startup. Less politics, less
optimizing for career advancement, much closer to the customer and the
decisions.

2) You want to learn. At a startup, you'll get to do everything. I'm assuming
you're an engineer, so you'll get to do backend, frontend, ML, scaling, infra,
etc. But you also get to do things like customer support, sales, marketing,
etc, which are very valuable skills to learn and understand.

3) You want to do a startup yourself. Seeing how a startup works, and learning
the hard lessons of how it doesn't, makes a huge difference if you ever want
to start one later.

There are also other good reasons to go to google: you'll get to operate at a
scale that a startup wont (that's a plus and a minus), you'll automatically
have tons of customers for whatever you build, etc, etc.

Decide on your goals and what to optimize for, and only then can people help
you choose.

~~~
khazhou
Disclaimer: I'm an ex-FANG, ex-founder, now-again-FANG, so I'm also biased.

I'm somewhat bothered by your comment about money:

> If your goal is just money (which is fine, don't be afraid to say this),
> then definitely go to google.

I find this disingenuous, as money is also a big reason why people do
startups, both the employees and the founders. The founders could have chosen
to implement their idea inside Google or wherever (with an army of marketing,
virtually unlimited funding as long as the idea is working out, and all forms
of support to bolster the team and the product), but the founder passed on
that in order to reap the huge rewards that come with owning a successful
company. Or, in order to have "personal" control (inasmuch as you can have
that when you still have investors, a Board, and an indifferent target
audience).

Sure, there are _some_ founders whose vision genuinely doesn't fit inside any
FANG... but those are the exception. For most visions, the best possible way
to realize them is inside BigCo.

Also, the promise of a Google-sized payday is hinted at to employees ("Join
us... we think this is a Google-sized opportunity" is a common thing founders
say). Even your own statement ("you _might_ make $10m, but that's unlikely")
embodies the dream and the _challenge_ presented to a prospective employee
who's ready for a big risk, to put their guarantees and expected-outcomes on
the line for that sweet $10m.

The prospective employee probably doesn't realize that the founders who are
pitching them on .01% still hold 60% between the two of them, and a different
class of shares. The prospective doesn't realize that there is only an
infinitesimally, vanishingly small likelihood they'll make even close to what
they'll make at the big company.

But even when the employees make very little, the founders still have a good
path to making bank, in the case of even a minor acquisition or an acquihire.

~~~
stock_toaster
Startup Non-founders statistically /rarely/ have their options worth much of
anything in the end. Startups also generally pay less than FANG companies to
boot (typically until they are no longer startups).

------
sfuller
Having done both startup/agency work and working as a "cog in a big machine",
hands down a "cog in a big machine" is far better for someone early in their
career, looking to build good engineering habits.

1) Most startup code is hot garbage.

2) High caliber engineering practices rub off on you. - Surrounding yourself
with talent and writing software is the best way to be good at what you do.
Being in a small startup, that is almost certainly not going to happen. The
numbers just don't allow for it.

3) Don't underestimate the draw of a major player like Google on your resume.
- Before working for one of these companies, my LinkedIn mailbox would get
maybe one or two messages a year from recruiters. Now my problem is making
sure to politely decline all of the messages I get in a timely fashion.

4) A hefty sign-on bonus, HEALTH INSURANCE, and in most cases bonuses or stock
offerings normally come as part of the deal with a Google offer. - Do you want
a house, car, education, children, retirement? If you answer yes to any of
these, a company like Google will give you a great financial foundation to
work from so that once you've established yourself you can take more
calculated risks with a much better safety net.

~~~
Noumenon72
Maybe the market's kind of hot, I've been getting recruited on LinkedIn almost
since I started (non-BigTech) employment two years ago. We had a contractor
fresh out of bootcamp who got recruiting messages too and left after seven
months. I never considered responding because I considered it spam, but it
looks like there are some good canned responses you can send:
[https://www.themuse.com/advice/5-email-templates-to-
respond-...](https://www.themuse.com/advice/5-email-templates-to-respond-to-
recruiters-no-matter-where-you-are-in-your-search).

------
gnomeduck
Advice from someone who had a similar choice and went the startup route:
choose the Google option. It will not only open doors for you for all your
future jobs, but you can invest the money now and create a nice start for
yourself.

There will never be any shortage of interesting startups to work for in the
future.

~~~
zerr
> It will not only open doors for you for all your future jobs

Is this true though? I guess it might help with the first contact, but I've
heard from x-googlers that they still had to prepare and pass all those
whiteboard CS-riddle based interviews again, for next endeavors.

~~~
coolwhhip
Sample size of one: my company tends to ding candidates from Google if they
have any whiff of the kind of status- or compensation-driven thinking
displayed in this comment section. Can sometimes indicate limited independent
thinking and low concern for others. Definitely can close doors.

~~~
mav3rick
What's compensation driven thinking ? There's a difference between only caring
about money vs asking for what you deem fair. Startups always abuse the
naivete of new grads and low ball them by saying they are working for a
grander cause. That is BS too.

~~~
jstandard
This isn't a fair assessment.

Startups can't pay BigCo wages because they don't have the money to. They have
to leverage other, harder-to-value benefits which BigCo generally can't offer.

Increased responsibility, fewer "rules" on how to execute, more tightly
focused mission are a few.

Naturally this differs company to company and there are always bad actors.

The compensation equation works out differently for each individual. Not
everyone should work at a startup.

~~~
mav3rick
And that is fair. But the parent comment insinuated that anyone asking for
money is doing something wrong or is inferior to "someone who truly loves
technology". It's a highly personal decision with no right or wrong IMO.

~~~
jstandard
Agreed. "Compensation-driven thinking" may not be the best choice of words.
Money is always a touchy subject.

I read parent's comment to be more about highlighting the expectations
mismatch that occurs sometimes when candidates aren't willing to make
compromises and then blame the startup for being "too stingy".

I've seen this mismatch occur on both sides of the table. Startups have a
harder time hiring due to as they need to seek people willing to forgo direct
compensation in exchange for these harder-to-value benefits. Startups need to
stay self-aware they'll have a harder time hiring since the candidate pool is
smaller.

Candidates applying to startups also need to temper their salary expectations.
If you want to join a startup, especially pre-Series C, and you're not willing
to compromise on direct compensation, then prepare for a harder time. The
employer pool is much smaller and you're not likely to get the most out of
working at a startup if salary is a top priority.

------
cynicalkane
Choose Google.

If the startup can only offer you 1/3 the pay, we can infer that their equity
isn't worth very much, or investors would have given them more money.

So you believe in the startup. That's great. It's great to believe in writing
good software. It's wrong that someone would want to exploit that for their
own gain. It very strongly sounds like what you're being offered is a
pittance. Don't sell your dreams for that little, because someone that will
offer you so little for your dreams isn't worth working for.

------
burlesona
Google. In a few years you’ll have a million in the bank and then you can
afford to roll the dice on any startup that catches your interest, if you
still want to.

~~~
JustSomeNobody
Does Google really pay that well?

~~~
sidlls
Yes. Base pay for a very junior hire is $140k - $160k and equity ranges from
$250k to $400k or more (vesting over four years, so $62.5k to $100k per year).
After annual bonus and raises, for a single person who lives reasonably and
has no debt it's about 4-6 years from zero to $1M in the bank.

~~~
joshuamorton
That's a bit inflated. That's l4 comp, whereas very junior would be l3 comp,
which is a bit less (120-140 base and much less equity).

It gets confusing because of stock lettering and such.

~~~
drewg123
Not to mention the bonus multipliers and RSU grants depend a lot on your
level. I recall there was a steep difference between L5 and L6. I assume there
is a similar one between L3 and L4..

~~~
joshuamorton
Bonus multiplier is the same up to l5, it starts growing rather quickly after
that, but yeah target rsu grants change significantly from level to level
(iirc they approximately double from 3 to 4 and also from 4 to 5).

------
iamleppert
If you are interested in the problem domain of the startup, do the startup. If
you aren't interested in it, it's not your life passion, don't do it. You will
learn more at the startup about the tech game in general, but that knowledge
will only be worth something if it is part of a longer term strategy as no one
startup is an assured success. Also, there is risk in joining a startup. I'm
not talking about the financial risk, I'm talking about the risk of you
joining some startup that has no good mentors to learn from, and, while you
will certainly have more "change control" than at a large company, what point
is that if you are constantly making the wrong changes? Unless you're a person
that likes to (and can) learn on their own the hard way. Prepare yourself for
the possibility that you may be the only one you can "fall back on".

Google, on the other hand, will provide a different kind of education. You'll
generally learn the same amount of information but it will be more specialized
and the pace will generally be slower (which can be a good thing). There will
be less pressure on "getting something done and working" and more pressure on
"doing the right thing". These two characteristics are often directly opposed
which is why a lot of people who like startups say they hated Google and vice
versa. The negative in that being if you spend several years specializing in a
very bespoke part of Google, you won't be any more prepared to either join a
startup or start your own -- the only way to get startup experience is to work
for one. In fact, although people may respect that you've worked at Google, in
my experience ex-Googlers aren't an assured success as startup employees and
are no better as founders than someone coming from any of the other large
companies. It can be a shell-shock coming from Google where there is a lot of
support to join a startup where there is no support and you must loosen your
standards and understand where you can and cannot cut corners. Also those
people who make excellent early stage startup employees often don't survive
the transition to behemoth tech company.

------
lockee
Speaking from experience, this is a very hard choice. I've been there too.
I've drunk the Kool-Aid and decided that startups are the place for young
ambitious people to be. 5 years later, working for a second startup now I
regret the choice I've made.

Difference in my case was that the startup actually paid well too. In the long
run though it was not worth it.

The first startup I was working failed within a year even though from the
outside it looked like it was going for the stars. The second one, kind of
stagnated.. reached a ramen profitability but is far from hockey-stick growth
everyone would like to see. I'm looking to change jobs now but noone cares if
you're doing the best job in a company noone ever heard of. In the meantime my
friends working for Big Corps make careers, and while they are being given
responsibilities much slower their personal growth seems more.. robust. Well
known names really open you many doors.

If you manage to find a successful startup, that will become a unicorn, great
for you, this is probably one of the best things that can happen to a person.
But it's bloody hard to know beforehand. For me going forward it's either my
own startup or working for a well-known name that people will recognize.

------
danilocesar
Those options are totally worthless for new startups, don't care about them.
In 4 years chances says they will be still worthless. Specially if the startup
didn't go over a funding round yet.

Consider only the job, what would make you happy. Would it be super cool,
super distruptive, super inovative? The perspective of the future is worth the
risk? Then choose the startup.

But if you are on this for the money, or if you care about risk, choose
Google.

~~~
nwatson
Plus early stage stock always gets diluted in further rounds of capital
raising ... that 6% will turn into 1% or less and some later hires inevitably
will end up with a lot more.

------
tptacek
Unless you're coming on as part of the management team --- really, even then,
I guess --- 6% seems like a bit of a bad sign. That's _a lot_. Like, that's
the kind of grant you get when nobody is sure how things will turn out, not
when something is locked in.

------
dagss
To me it sounds like Google...

Take what Google offers as a baseline. Convert the difference per year to
stock at a _realistic_ valuation (as in, if you were a VC what would you
give). Compare it, factoring in the strike price (so at a strike price of 0
you will be offered 6%/4 per year..)

Perhaps throw in a 20% rebate for "more fun job", but then again remember that
the "VC valuation" of the stock is what VCs with a lot more capability for
risk than you, so perhaps you want a 20% risk penalty (or more!)

"But the startup cannot afford to pay market". No, but they should compensate
through sufficient ownership. Otherwise you will just be working hard to try
to make someone else rich.

You don't say what stage it is, current valuation etc which is very important
here.

------
MisterTea
Google.

My brother left a good job for a promising start up last year. Without getting
into detail he wound up quitting a few weeks before they closed up shop. It
started out great but quickly fizzled out due to the lack lack of a cohesive
goal. It's a high risk that he took and lost. Now he's looking for work again.
He regrets the decision.

YMMV but Google is a guarantee and a great resume stuffer.

------
ChuckMcM
First job? Go work for Google. Make a lot of friends, figure out who is
compatible with your work style and who isn't and remember them for future
recruiting calls :-)

If you're more senior I suggest picking the job where you will learn the most.
My personal experience is that wider experience is better than deeper
experience in a fast changing world.

~~~
rishav_sharan
This. Also companies like Google and Microsoft love welcoming back employees
who were good and gad switched over to other companies. So, if you had a good
reputation in google, and want to take a few years to work on a startup, you
will likely have a fallback option if things don't work out

------
aj7
Read some articles about the way people get diluted in successful startups.
That should change the expectation value calculation. Also, you will have a
larger network at Google.

------
KennyCason
I agree with most people’s advice about going to Google. My additional reason
for advising you to go to Google is that you seem to be on the fence. The
startup option is a great option if you’re very passionate about it.

While I didn’t have a Google offer, I had a Lockheed offer and that was always
a company I really liked growing up (also former Marine). It was a difficult
choice for me as well, but I chose Lockheed and I have zero regrets. I learned
a lot about large organizations and got to work with a huge team of very smart
people. Many of which who very directly mentored me. I worked there for two
years + 3 years previously for internships.

When the startup bug became irresistible, I knew it was time and went and co-
founded DataRank with some friends. The Lockheed experience helped me in the
sense that it “validated” me, much like Google on your resume will certainly
validate you.

In regards to money: When I finally went the startup root I made 1/4 my salary
and had zero benefits for the first 1.5 years. If you’re passionate enough
about it you won’t really care about that 1/3 salary (for a while at least).
Then I bumped my salary to 1/3 my previous salary! It wasn’t until after 2
years when my salary returned to 80% my previous salary. Eventually a
surpassed my previous salary, then double and tripled it, and now I optimize
more for doing what I love.

------
joeblau
This is a really tough decision and there are lots of things to weigh.

1\. The equity sounds all good and well, but you need to know the intentions
of the founder — would they every consider selling or doing an IPO. If not,
your shares will have zero value.

2\. What space is the startup in? Do they have a technology where they are
both building a moat and growing at a rate where they will be around in 5-10
years?

3\. Can you live on 1/3 of what Google is offering you?

If you believe your startup is the next Dropbox, Airbnb, Uber, SpaceX or
Pinterest I would say join that. The thing about these mega-companies (Google,
Apple, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon) is that they aren't going anywhere and if
you made it through the interview already, I'm sure you can do it again. These
mega-companies are filled with brilliant people so you will definitely learn a
lot about running projects at scale. They are also filled with bureaucracy
(unless you're on a skunk works team with no budget) which sucks if you're the
type of person that likes to move quickly.

In my opinion, a great startup beats any mega-company any day of the week.

------
AtlasBarfed
Assuming you are very early in your career, take the google money now and
invest. When you know what you're doing with respect to the market and have
more connections and a bit of a financial base, then do a startup.

------
chamza
I was in a similar situation, I had offers from both companies and chose the
startup, but ultimately ended up at Google.

I was up with the startup for 6 months, it was not a good fit for me and I
lost faith in the company quickly. A recruiter reached out to me from Google
while I was there to follow up. I did not need to re-interview and they
brought me in since I was still in the system as an accepted candidate (I
think this stands for one year). so I got to experience the best of both
worlds. I’m still at google 2 years later, I can echo the sentiments of it
opening up many more doors

------
m_ke
Go work at Google for 2-3 years, save some money then start your own startup
if you feel like it.

Being an early employee at a startup is usually not worth it.

------
Rafuino
Depends on what you'll be working on at Google, IMHO. Coding to sell more ads?
Hell no. Coding to siphon more data on users from adjacency businesses to
eventually sell more ads? Also hell no. That's like 85% of Google's business,
so...

~~~
timmm
I don't know the access to resources, sheer scale, research, and good pay
would make it pretty enticing for me. But really it comes down to what you are
looking for long term. Do you want to optimize, finances, lifestyle, work in a
particular space, learn more and eventually start your own thing? A job at
Google probably scores well along most of these dimensions.

------
joejerryronnie
So here are your choices:

1) Work for Google

2) Work for startup for 1/3 the compensation, at least 50% more working hours,
and options that have a 95% chance of being worth zero dollars at some point
in the future.

It seems like the obvious choice would be Google but it also depends on what
life stage you're at. If young and just starting out, there's no easier time
to take a risk. If you've got a family to support, maybe the sure bet is a
better way to go. Plus, if you're gonna take a risk later in life, you should
take that risk on yourself not on someone else (i.e. start your own company).

~~~
clubm8
>Work for startup for 1/3 the compensation, at least 50% more working hours,
and options that have a 95% chance of being worth zero dollars at some point
in the future.

Google has good work/life balance?

------
kozikow
IMO it depends on the person. I know some people who would thrive in the
startup environment but would be annoyed in big corp. And vice versa. Matching
your work style to the company style will matter more for your work enjoyment
than a bit more $.

I worked in both and met both kinds of people in both kinds of environment.
There are many factors at play, but I think the most significant is your
uncertainty tolerance and excitement appetite:

\- Startups are more chaotic but more exciting.

\- Corps will be more boring but will pay better and offer less uncertainty.

------
mdhughes
Do you want safe, reliable money at the cost of your conscience? Do you want
to be one tiny cog in the machine that tracks and annihilates humanity? Choose
Google.

Do you want adventure, high risk of failure, and being able to live with
yourself, even if it means struggling sometimes? Choose the startup.

~~~
tuananh
> being able to live with yourself

a bit too dramatic?

------
fatninja
Go for the startup when you are young(<30) Startup is your best crash course
into the industry. It can force you learn lot of things in a short amount of
time. Sure, it will be stressful, startup may fail but you got time at your
hand and you can move on with your gained experience. If you got into google
at this point, your chances of getting into google in the future is on the
higher side(+experience from your startup).

------
jheriko
> but I get about 6% options over 4 years

on what conditions can you turn that into something you can spend?

there is usually a good reason people offer magic beans instead of cold hard
cash... an 99% of the time it is because they are less valuable, and possibly
valueless (even if the company does well the requirements to cash in will
often be prohibitive)

------
dvdhnt
Good intentions are great, but if the startup fails, 6% of nothing is zero.
That’s not including the difficult financial position you could find yourself
in if something goes wrong while working for the startup.

Take the money, training, and network. You’ll be well positioned to join or
found any number of interesting startups.

Go with Google.

------
nicodjimenez
Trust your instincts, ignore everyone else, and don't overthink it.

The startup could fail and lead to some other amazing opportunity or you going
back to Google with a better job. The startup could succeed and be career
defining. The startup could fail and be a waste of time. Google job could be
career defining. Google could end up destroying your passion for your job, but
make it extremely hard to leave, so you'll be trapped doing work that doesn't
mean much for some of the best years of your life.

There's no way of knowing, and no right or wrong decisions when the goal is
undefined.

------
binbag
I run a start-up so I'm biased. I also used to work in academia, and went
straight from that to a start-up because I loathe the idea of working for a
big engineering firm (I'm an electrical/electronic/photonic engineer). So keep
that in mind when reading.

Some comments here point out that only large organisations have the
infrastructure required to really pull off certain fields, e.g. ML. Agreed,
but surely this is field/interest dependent. I think most fields can be
supported well by a start-up environment.

Consider the productivity. Some of the best engineering and commercial
achievements were done on a tight budget - see the history of ARM, Microsoft,
etc. I can vouch for how demanding, educating, and satisfying it is to work in
a closely knit engineering team towards a common goal, with everyone around
you pulling their weight and having their talents 100% utilised. There is no
room for slackers in a small organisation - you will not have any useless
colleagues, no wasted time, no pointless tasks. Your skills will expand in
every direction - and not just in technical fields (although you will probably
need to dabble in a range of these).

Consider the share options. 6% is a lot. Have they raised any money? Find out.
Imagine they've raised £0.5m for 20% (a small angel round). That values your
6% at £150,000 today. If they raise a Series A of £2m for another 20% in a few
years' time, your shares will be simultaneously diluted by the newly-issued
shares but also stepped up in value. Now your options are worth £0.48m. By the
time you exercise your options, you'll probably be a millionaire. This isn't
trivial, and it's a typical conservative trajectory. Of course, you need to
consider the 6% offer as an investor would - do you think the business is
going to succeed? If not, go to Google. If you think it will, why turn down
that transient opportunity?

Consider the transferability of the skills you will develop. If you work for a
large org you will focus on one field, probably. You may become renowned for
that. If you want to work in a start-up later, you need to find the one that
suits, and they better be able to afford your specialist skills. If you work
for a start-up now, you will develop broad skills and a huge amount of
experience solving multiple challenges. Your engineering confidence will be
immense and this will be recognised by employers. A very capable generalist
who can be trusted to learn whatever is needed to solve tomorrow's challenge
is every engineering employer's dream.

Do you want to be an anonymous cog in a corporate machine, or do you want to
be a genuinely valued member of a team that is producing something new and
valuable, that is creating its own culture, its own processes, its own market?

------
mooreds
I just want to drop this article about the benefits and detriments of working
at a startup:

[https://www.atrium.co/blog/work-at-a-
startup/](https://www.atrium.co/blog/work-at-a-startup/)

I would also add that working at a startup gets harder and harder the bigger
your monthly expenses are, so the earlier you can try that the better (source:
I am in my 40s and recently left a startup that I believe in because of
financial and family reasons).

------
zuhayeer
Check out [http://levels.fyi](http://levels.fyi) and see if you'd be happy
with the progression of leveling up / compensation at Google. At a startup,
while the risk is higher, the prospect of receiving compounded gains on value
that you've created early on is hard to overlook. And the linear loss you are
taking for both is basically just the time you spend there. Are you
comfortable doing that right now?

------
naveenspark
You could always try the startup for 1 year and see how it goes. This way you
get past your cliff, and you will have a much better idea of whether or not it
has a chance of becoming something. If its flopping around like a fish then
you can always go to a big co. Yes it would have cost you some $$$ short term,
but you would have probably learned a lot more simply by having to wear more
hats. Plus its a lot of fun to build something new from the ground up.

------
starchild_3001
Yeah, come to Google. PS: I work there, and it's a good place :)

In all seriousness, promising startups are few and far between. If you find
one (aligned with your interests), by all means jump on it :)

How do you know if a startup is super promising?

i) Check out their source of funding. If super reputable VCs => Good signal.

ii) Check out their attrition. If it's a revolving door, don't go there.

iii) Check out the employees. Best startups tend to have highly credentialed
employees (e.g. formerly very successful startup founders).

iv) Is the startup on a continuous growth trajectory? Best startups are on one
without much setback. Again, multiple setbacks => Don't go there.

v) I wouldn't bet on the specific idea or the problem being solved. Who
would've guessed Facebook, Uber, Airbnb would be massive hits purely based on
the idea? Betting on momentum (e.g. user growth) and/or the team is somewhat
easier to measure and understand.

vi) Where do you see yourself (and the startup) in 2, 3, 5 years if you join?
Will you gain skills and reputation highly relevant to your next steps? How
big is the addressable market (and potential market value) of the startup?

It's best to make a list of factors you care about (money, location etc). Rank
each option by each factor. Add things up in the end.

These are the rules that I personally follow. Best of luck!

------
cfarm
[https://www.atrium.co/blog/work-at-a-
startup/](https://www.atrium.co/blog/work-at-a-startup/)

------
treya
The "right" startup - one that is bootstrapped, has a successful product idea,
a good founder, competent employees, and equity - is almost always a better
choice than the big firm. That's because you'll get to wear all hats, learn on
the fly, learn to do everything and anything to make the product successful,
and with luck get a big chunk of change in a few years.

That said, companies like this are few and far between. Especially now,
apparently with most startup companies opting in early for venture capital or
angel investor funding, which dilutes both your opportunity for equity and say
in the company. And honestly, there are a lot of dumb ideas out there. Also,
if you're relatively new to the industry, you probably don't have the ability
to recognize the right startup opportunity.

In most cases, it's better to start off at a big company and learn the ropes,
and when you think you've done that, take your time watching for the startup
opportunity, and then make that move. In the long run, though, no one really
is going to look out for you. With these two steps under your belt, you'll
have the background to be your own founder one day.

------
bdcravens
Statistically there's a good chance you'll end up owning 6% of $0.

------
jacquesm
It depends on whether you are driven by money or by a need to have fun or to
be more in control. If money is your main driver then Google any day. If you
want to be in control then the start-up is good but only if you are a very
early hire.

If you want to have fun it depends on how the fit is between what you will do
at both places, then pick then one that seems most suitable.

------
bdcravens
Plug the difference in pay (less taxes) into an investment calculator. Give it
a nice return - after all, you need to beat what you'd make earning the same
and investing it yourself. Look at where you'd be when you vest, and calculate
the exit needed to essentially make that return. First of all, what's the
likelihood of that exit happening? Secondly, would you take the risk if you
can't at least beat a moderately performing mutual fund? (Not even getting
into idea that with Google, that same wealth could be invested in different
ways, rather than all tied up in one company)

The number I came up with: 25% for return (doubles historical return of S&P
500; most decent funds are in 15% territory over last 10 years), worth about
$750,000 in four years. So you'd need about a $13M exit at that point.
(Obviously whether your pay returns to market, or you continue to be paid the
startup rate, affects this, as does an exit before you are fully vested)

------
gorbachev
I would only choose the startup, if they're working on something that you're
personally super passionate about and if Google isn't doing work in that area.

Additionally the startup would have to be run by people whose abilities to run
the business in all of its aspects I trust 100%.

If the pay is 1/3, financially the only logical option is Google.

------
alex_young
Try Google for a couple of years. Move around and work on different teams.
Leave and join a startup of your choosing. The Google brand is like going to
Stanford or something. You'll have many more options and better connections.
Maybe you'll also have enough cash to start your own thing.

------
jlarocco
Nobody can answer that question for you.

It's hard to even say for sure without knowing what the startup is working on,
but I would _probably_ choose the startup because I think Google's tracking is
creepy and unethical, I don't like big corporations, and the extra money isn't
important to me.

------
qaq
So after 4 years in Google's case you'd have 800K extra (most likely more
depending on how you invest) plus Google on your resume. The 6% will get
diluted into ? If you are so confident in your ability to pick winners you are
better than top 1% of VCs.

~~~
Crash0v3rid3
Whoa that’s insane. Mind sharing how you can get to 800k in 4 years. I just
hit my first year at Google. I’m likely getting my second Strongly Exceeds in
perf but no idea what my stock refresh will be. Assuming you’d have to do some
smart investing to get that high so quickly.

Edit: Think I misunderstood. My regular salary will be about that much total
in 4 years.

------
gmenegatti
IMHO, disregarding compensation, Identify and learn everything possible about
who will be your boss/manager/mentor.

This will significantly impact on your ability to succeed and on your
happiness.

(Most of) People don’t leave companies, they leave their bosses/managers.

------
fuzquat
I did the startup thing. The ROI was crap compared to working at Google.

If you want to do the startup thing go ahead. You will have more stress and
less money at the end of it compared to Google but Google will still be there
to hire you at the end.

------
PopeDotNinja
When you say the startup in promising, do it have any momentum or traction at
all? Are they making money, scaling like crazy, anything like that? Any upward
tick in momentum can turn into a big pile of money super fast. And if you like
the people with whom you interviewed, you could have a lot of fun working with
them in close quarters. You'll (maybe? I don't really know) never have an
experience like growing a startup at Google, and working at a big company can
be the opposite of exciting. Google's probably a great employer. So you wanna
be fat & happy or sit on a rocket & aim for space?

------
IloveHN84
And you ask? Pick Google and you're set for the rest of your life as "Googler"
and as "Ex Googler", if you decide to start your own startup, it's easier than
ever and VCs will throw money at you.

Source: ex googler

~~~
shady-lady
I think 'ex google' has lost most of it's weight. Even if it was just used by
any of the > __30,000__ engineers, it would be diluted.

Adding to that mix is non-technical people trumpeting ex-google/insert some
other massive company on their profiles/pitches; it just doesn't mean that
much.

Oh, you handled frontline customer service/ad sales/some other mundane role
for Google? So what?

Getting in to Google was once a sign of something. I don't see it as a high
signal filter anymore.

~~~
conductr
I don’t think the world has reached your POV. Maybe it will. But hiring
managers can weed through the crap. And for now hiring exgooglers is like the
old saying that nobody gets fired for buying IBM. It’s a strong signal of
capability because presumably google wouldn’t have employed you long if you
weren’t hitting their objectives regardless of your role.

------
jfasi
Here's my personal experience:

In 2012 I graduated from college and was deciding pretty much exactly this. I
interviewed at Google and got an offer, and had to decide between that and the
startup life. I ended up going with Google. My immediate thought process
centered around money because I had substantial debts from university, so
while I wouldn't have admitted it at the time, startups were kind of out of
the question.

In the end, I'm glad I made the choice I did. Here are some observations about
Google in particular, but I expect they extend to some degree to other
organizations:

* Google places a _lot_ of focus on development. The job ladder explicitly stresses growth, which places expectations on engineers to grow their abilities throughout their early careers. Equally important, it places pressure on managers to grow those same engineers: directors treat teams full of people whose performance evaluations aren't rising and who aren't getting promoted as a major red flag when evaluating the team's manager. I was consistently pushed to do more and bigger projects, and my work and abilities have flourished as a result.

* There's more than one way to "do things right" in engineering, but in my opinion Google's particular style nails it. Code reviews are mandatory. Rigorous testing is compulsory. Regular refactoring is held in high regard. Production environments are sacrosanct. SLAs and SLOs are explicitly made clear. SREs rule over the engineers, not vice versa. Detailed design documents are (at least in my org) mandatory. Postmortems are also mandatory. You literally can't even go to the bathroom without seeing a pro-tip about how to improve your project. Working in this environment for years teaches you to produce high quality work at a fast pace.

* As a result of all this, recruiters _looove_ Google engineers. During the few times over the years when I considered letting myself get poached, I was being offered either extremely high-paying senior engineer positions at established companies, or high-ranking technical leadership roles at younger companies. Six years of developing my technical and leadership skills have paid off, and I'm convinced I'm more valuable now than I would have been if I had gone to a startup.

* This is my personal view on early-stage startups, and you don't mention your experience level, so it might not apply to you, but: keep out of reach out children. When you're staring down the barrel of a three month runway, you don't have time to learn, from scratch, how to solve technical problems _and_ somehow foster an engineering culture that's going to pay dividends down the line as the company grows. Better to learn your trade in a safe and stable environment and then apply it to building a new organization once you're confident in it.

Finally, an anecdote about money. Graduating from an Ivy, I naturally had many
trust funder friends who weren't aware of how broke I was and asked, to my
face, "why would someone as sharp as you go to such a boring company." They
went off and joined startups, took piles of equity in exchange for smaller
salaries, and went off confident in their fortunes. Then, one by one, over the
course of the next five years or so, they all requested referrals to join
Google when they companies failed. I happy obliged, but I don't think a single
one made it through the interview process. Meanwhile all this time I've been
sitting pretty on a nontrivial-but-not-life-changing pile of cash, taking on
ever more interesting projects, with a resume that companies salivate over.

As always, take my experience with a grain of salt, but that's just my view on
things.

~~~
pickgoogle
Do you think other large tech companies are like this? If so, which ones?

~~~
jfasi
I don’t have firsthand experience but my understanding is that Facebook shares
a similar culture. No idea about others though.

------
petercooper
If you have to ask the question, go with Google. If it's a decent engineering
position, it's like having Harvard or Oxford/Cambridge on your résumé and will
open doors in future.

------
joewee
Is this one of your first jobs? If it’s early in your career I always
recommend taking the big company option. You learn a lot of positive business
practices and the culture of large companies early on that will be very
helpful in your future, should you decide to start a company going up against
or selling to similar companies, you will also bring some of the discipline
needed to build a small biz into a large one. My career used the reverse model
and it took me a long time to realize the skills I was missing.

------
luckydata
Choose Google. I made the other choice and I ended up regretting it.

------
dollar
This is pretty easy. Take the Google job and stay there 3-4 years and sock
away $200k a year in savings. Then leave and go do a startup, there will still
be plenty to choose from.

------
drmrwh
If you're young, choose the startup. Say things work out: great! Say things
don't work out: you'll have had an interesting experience, and can then go
work for Google.

1\. If Google has offered you a position now, they absolutely will offer you a
position later. You wouldn't be burning any bridges, especially if you choose
a startup over them. 2\. It'll be a lot easier going from a startup to Google,
than from the comforts (and money) of Google to a startup.

~~~
dagss
Lack of self-control really is a bad reason to choose one over the other.

Just make a contract with yourself to save 2/3 of salary each month.

More savings and more experience puts you in a lot better position to do a
startup later at _your_ terms, as a co-founder or similar.

Early employee in startup is really the worst of all worlds.

------
cjbprime
Google. Your expected value for options should usually be $0.

~~~
fcuck_actuarial
The median is certainly 0.

~~~
mmirate
The median is what really matters when making almost any kind of decisions;
else you forever chase after improbable outliers.

------
seansmccullough
[http://danluu.com/startup-tradeoffs/](http://danluu.com/startup-tradeoffs/)

------
teddyh
Do you only want to compare the money? Or are you also considering the ethical
implications? Statistically, I would guess that working for the startup might
have a higher chance to be the more ethical option, but since you don’t say
what the startup actually does, I can’t know. Also, the one to decide the
ethics should be you, not me.

------
fuzzieozzie
You frame the question very narrowly.

Where are you in your career? How big is your network?

Life is a "marathon rather than a sprint." Consider both the immediate pay-off
and your long term ambition.

If you are in your twenties and aspire to build a great company in the future
the answer is different than if you are in your thirties and have a family to
support!

------
pmorici
There will never be a shortage of companies looking to hire you on the cheap.
I'd try Google for a couple years.

------
jtmcmc
I think the two things are what do you want to do and where are you in your
career?

Being at Google is the safe easy money and will most likely work out better
than your startup from an odds perspective. However, you'll be a cog in a very
large company whereas the startup you'll probably be able to have a huge
impact in (presumably if you're getting 6% in options, that's like
first/second engineer there or you're an exec).

If this is your first job one thing to consider is that having worked at
Google definitely is a good spot on your resume, recruiters like it, you'll
get reached out to by lots of other recruiters, it'll be super easy to find
another job which can honestly be more challenging if you just have no name
failed startups on your resume.

There is probably also more potential for title advancement at the new startup
also vs. google.

In my mind Google is a lot of sure money and you get to have a small impact on
something with potentially huge impact to the world/people/whatever

Small startups are a very small chance of some amount of money on the levels
of (car, house, fuck you) and you get to have a large impact on something that
may or may not have any discernible external impact.

------
anothergoogler
You didn't say what you'd be working on at Google, what the startup does, or
what your motivations are.

------
beambot
Where are you in your career, what is your personal financial situation, what
is your family situation (wife? kids?), what stage is the startup (revenue?),
etc, etc. Need a lot more details. Fwiw, 6% is an unusually high equity
package unless they just started the company.

------
imikay
Well established company vs future unknown startup, if you are confident with
the future of the startup then choose the latter, else choose the former. 6%
could be nothing if the startup fails. So it's an easy choice comparing to
choose between Google and Apple.

------
hfdgiutdryg
Google, without question.

You'll be gold-plating your resume. Also, knowing several people who have
worked at Google for years now, it's the only tech company I've heard of that
seems to take an active interest in a software engineers actual _career_ and
growth.

------
GuiA
If you care about the compensation, go with Google.

If you feel like the startup is doing something unbelievable and you want to
be onboard, go with them.

Google will still be around in a few years, and if you got an offer from them
now you are likely to be able to get one again in the future.

------
huffmsa
Google will take you in the future, the startup won't.

You're (presumably) young. Take risks, you have little downside.

You'll work yourself into the ground at the startup, but you'll learn more in
a year than you will being code monkey #20005 at Google.

~~~
dagss
The startup won't?? Another startup will...

------
ioddly
I'd say take the Google option, live like you took the startup offer and bank
the rest of the money. Then you'll have runway to do whatever the you please
for a while, and the Google name/network backing you up.

------
mk89
How likely is that you can join a company like Google and how likely is that
you can join a startup? Statistically, you should join Google as it's a one
off experience that probably no other companies can offer you.

------
dmourati
I've done both and now work for Google. You should read dan luu's coverage of
this:

[https://danluu.com/startup-tradeoffs/](https://danluu.com/startup-tradeoffs/)

------
gesman
Follow your excitement and feelings.

I'd take offer with more cash in the pockets vs. promise of bright future for
current sacrifice.

%% of startup shares is what they want you to believe in. What you haven't
been told is that your shares can and will be diluted via new investors coming
in who will buy more "preferred" shares without telling you. Preferred shares
will allow new investors to get paid X times of their original investment
before you see any penny at a potential exit (in case it will ever happen).

In startup world it evolves in a frequent and predictable disappointing
outcomes for "unaware" engineers and holders of regular, non-preferred
"options".

Take cash, save it and invest it in your own, future startup.

------
roguecoder
One real advantage of working for the startup: they probably won't ask you to
spy on Chinese dissidents, and you won't be profiting off of spying on Chinese
dissidents.

------
newusertoday
answer would depend on your current background and what this startup does.
From your wording it seems you are weighing it in terms of money. In that case
it is hands down google as it is already paying more, is considerably less
risky and will give you brand recognition for future employment. I think you
should weigh your options in terms of you future goals rather than money. I
would rephrase the question as Which step will help me realize my goals faster
and go with it.

------
stmw
Do the startup if their technologists are good -- you will learn at 10x the
rate. That compounds and will put you years ahead of those that pick the
Google option.

------
snow_mac
If you can live on the 1/3 that google is offering, take the google job, save
the difference between the two jobs and become really good at Google.

------
lordnacho
You probably want to say more about your situation. How much experience do you
have, what kinds of things are important to you? Are you already wealthy?

------
refulgentis
I've been in a similar situation with more upside – I suggest pulling up a
retirement calculator and seeing where you are financially compared to where
you want to be.

If you're interested in hearing more about the difference in cultures, and how
that will feel after some time, feel free to reply with a place I can contact
you privately.

------
sidcool
How did you get through the Google interviews? Genuine question. How did you
prepare?

------
noncoml
If ethics is not something to consider in your decision, I would say go for
Google. Work life balance will be better, and the money although probably less
are not a gamble. Plus having Google in your CV means you will probably be
able to join any startup you want if you change your mind down the line.

------
tdsamardzhiev
Go with Google. Better street cred, better contacts, better salary, better
everything. Best of all, it gives you the option to work normal hours and plan
your life.

Besides, working for startups is much better experience when you have a strong
financial backbone. And promising startups aren't going anywhere.

------
smilekzs
I would only start considering if the salary was 2/3 instead of 1/3.

------
Hnrobert42
Consider the ethics of working for a company that makes its money extracting
data from users to sell advertisements. (Sure, it does other stuff, too.) If
your promising startup does the same, maybe it is a wash.

------
testtestla
Take Google and see if u can do advisory work for the startup on side for
equity.

I am bias as worked at Google but left for startup world and would never go
back. The Google name can open pretty much any doors

~~~
Itaxpica
This would be a violation of Google’s anti-moonlighting clause, so only take
this advice if you’re willing to lose your job at Google over it.

~~~
dmitrygr
Which is unenforceable because it is a violation of the California labor code
section 96 k.
[https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=LAB&sectionNum=96).

~~~
Hydraulix989
It doesn't have to be enforced if they fire you "without cause" (because of
the moonlighting)

~~~
dmitrygr
Which is exactly when the labor board would come along and sue them for it
very publicly, yes

~~~
Hydraulix989
Under what grounds? The burden of proof is on the employee and the employer
can just stonewall and deny everything with zero recourse.

They could claim it was your performance, your motivation, conflict with the
team or anything else really if they were ever pressed to give a reason.

------
xte
Economically Google, professionally a startup. Google seems to be evolved from
a tech company to a bureaucratic one, so definitively not attractive except
for salary reasons.

------
fanf2
Are you happy with the moral downside of working for a company that sells its
users’ privacy for profit? A company that values automation more than customer
service?

~~~
amf12
That's a good question. However, its easier said than done. Say whatever you
want about Google and the likes and hate them, but for a dev, it's still one
of the best places to learn, grow and get paid well. At that point most
peoples moral compass tilts. I know so many people who said they would never
work at Microsoft, Facebook, Google. However when they got an offer they
accepted it. :)

------
jiveturkey
i would search over the innumerable other times this has been covered in HN
and many blogs

------
jiveturkey
you are certainly misreading the offer. there is _no way_ you are getting 6%

------
uzero
You listen to your conscience.

------
johnwh
I chose a startup over a better Big Company offer (although no where near the
difference in pay), and deeply regret it. Understandably the grass is always
greener on the other side, etc., however here are a few things to consider:

1\. Really stupid things can happen, even with established startups. We lost
our 401k and may possibly lose our healthcare (although that is looking more
promising) when our HR/Ops manager went on extended leave and their
replacement is still struggling with the basics. This isn't due to a lack of
funds, but rather the new person being disorganized and ignoring emails from
Zenefits. When I joined we were a well oiled machine, but we were dependent on
one person, and things fell apart quite quickly after they took leave.

2\. People are still people. No matter how much say you have, your startup
will make a bad hire, most likely many. This happens at all companies, but
startups particularly struggle with finding decent candidates at early to mid
stages. The difference is, that with a startup having a bad employee can make
work significantly worse without any proper recourse. Even if you hire great
people, you may find that the startup you joined is culturally different 6
months to a year later. Things change fast, and for many things go from great
to awful within the span of 3 months.

3\. When it comes to bad hires and politics, the most common complaint at
large companies is that the only people who get promoted are those that are
friends with the manager, etc. That is an issue no doubt, but at startups
everyone is expected to be friends, and the role between boss and friend is
even more blurred. We have a legitimately bad employee (caught her twice
rebasing her PRs after reviews, so changes could not be tracked between
commits, in which she responded to review comments by adding carriage returns
so github showed that the code changed and therefore hid the comments), but
there is no proper path to reporting this, and bringing up these issues are
extremely taboo on my team, especially because she is now close friends with
our boss (they meetup during vacations). Sure, this happens at large
companies, but I cannot move teams or even refer to a standard to we can stop
this from happening. Honestly, it hurts the most because the whole point of a
startup is that you care about the product and team, so when this happens it
just becomes a low paid job since you lose the culture of trust.

There is a lot of good that comes with startups, but I will be honest, unless
you are starting your own, or are young and are looking to be best
friends/party with your coworkers and make your job a lifestyle, it usually is
not worth it.

 _edit_ I wanted to add one more point: The startup I was at previously gave
me 1% of shares. Things were not working out well, and our CEO sold for an
acquisition hire in which he made ~$1.5 million, and I would have made ~$36k
after vesting for 3 more years. Literally, with the acquisition hire signing
bonus and new salary, I would have made less than I do now from just switching
jobs than if I stayed.

------
akatechis
Google (and any MegaCorp) will siphon out any love you have for your
profession. Go startup.

~~~
fcuck_actuarial
Mediocre startup compensation combined with the bay area cost of living and
the added work/life imbalance can arguably do the same thing.

------
qubax
It depends on your age, what sector the startup is in, the prospects of the
startup and your relationship with the founders.

1\. Is it a real startup doing real/cutting edge technology work ( aka
cybersecurity, data, etc )? Will you be working on cutting edge development
work?

2\. Are you young with little to no responsibility ( aka no wife, kids, etc )

3\. Do you believe the startup has a shot?

4\. Do you respect and get along with the founders. And do they respect and
get along with you.

If all the above is yes, then you may not earn as much initially, but you will
most definitely learn a lot more than at google and you may be able to retire
in your 20s rather than 50s if everything works out. If not, then you will be
able to leverage the skill you picked up to get another job easily. Caveat
being you do real development work in a real software startup.

If you are a single digit employee at a startup with a good relationship with
the founders, not only will learn a lot technically and technologically, you
will also learn about angel investing, VC funding, etc. You might even get to
tag along to see what the hubbub is all about.

If it is a real startup, then the risks are higher but the upside is also
higher. With google, you will get stability and name recognition, but you are
still ultimately a corporate grunt and have to deal with burnout. Keep in mind
google has extremely high turnover rates ( I believe the median tenure for a
google employee is only 1 year ).

------
aviv
Definitely Google. There will always be "promising startups" and once you have
Google on your resume you will either be starting that startup or getting a
bigger chunk of it.

------
fcuck_actuarial
Anyone know how much Google would realistically offer someone with 4 years of
presumably irrelevant rails and sql experience?(As in, NOT in
('c++','java','javascript','python')

I'm predicting not much - and I bet they believe a significant part of the
"compensation" will be the "privilege" or working at google.

------
wallflower
Don't be greedy. Google is a gold-plated brand name that will offer tens if
not hundreds of individuals smarter than you.

6% options is about average for a co-founder-level tech lead at a very small
company.

You have to be realistic about your expectations for equity. It is more likely
the company gets acquired than goes IPO. If the company gets acquired for
$100M, then you may bring home around $4M post tax.

What is the company's competitive advantage? Usually, especially in AI/ML, it
is the people already working there. Who is working there that will be smarter
and more experienced than you that you can learn from?

Or will you be the chief cook and bottle washer?

~~~
dagss
"6% options is about average for a co-founder-level tech lead at a very small
company."

Even if true, the fact that there are a lot of gullible young tech leads
driving this average down is no good reason that the poster should be equally
gullible.

Do the startup thing when it can be _your_ thing. "First employee" is really
the worst of all worlds.

------
nathan_f77
There could be a third option: Find some contract work [1], become a digital
nomad [2] for a while, find a great city with a very low cost-of-living and
stay there for a few months (or years), work on some of your own product ideas
and try the "indie hacker" thing [3].

Worst case: You spend a few years working ~5 hours per week (or a few months
per year), and spend the rest of your time just enjoying life and doing
whatever you want. You can work on your own ideas and have full creative
freedom, even if most of your ideas don't work out.

[1] [https://www.moonlightwork.com](https://www.moonlightwork.com),
[https://www.toptal.com](https://www.toptal.com)

[2] [https://nomadlist.com](https://nomadlist.com)

[3] [https://www.indiehackers.com](https://www.indiehackers.com)

------
hevi_jos
That is a personal question. Nobody can choose for you. Nobody. Not your
parents, or your partner,or people on hacker news, it is you.

As an adult you start making decisions that will affect the rest of your life.
Children have their decisions taken for them.

If you take the decision of going with the startup it will be one of the worst
experiences in your life. If will be daunting, it will be taking risks every
single day. At the same time, you will be making a contribution. Even if you
fail you will learn things you will never learn in Google. If you success you
will be free with freedom few things will ever give you.

If you go with Google you will be safe, isolated of the mundane problems most
people have and you will be able to focus immensely on very interesting
problems sharing your time with some of the smartest people on earth. On the
other hand your creative and independent muscle will almost disappear,
atrophied by not using it, as the big organization takes the load from your
shoulders. Over time, it will make your shoulders less strong.

The decision is yours to make. Write down on a paper what your values and
priorities are in your life and how each decision will affect them.

------
gfodor
Going to work somewhere because of the overall expected benefits after many
years it will have to you financially, how it will look on your resume, or the
"reputation" it will give you are all absolutely terrible reasons to do so, if
for no other reason that these aspects are horribly difficult to predict and
generally speaking are predicated upon tomorrow being like today, which in
tech is often the opposite of the truth. Not only that, but these aren't the
things that are likely to get you up in the morning. Going to a job you hate
because it will look good on your resume after a few years sounds like a
special kind of hell.

Will you be able to work on problems interesting to you or you think are
important, with people you like and enjoy working with? Nobody can answer the
question for you but Google and a startup are going to offer wildly different
answers to that question. That's the aspect I would focus on. Everyone in this
thread who is telling you they can predict the net effect on your finances or
your reputation or future career options after a few years give themselves too
much credit.

And hell, in my own experience going through a failed startup has actually had
an equally positive impact on my life as another I co-founded which was more
successful. Don't let people fool you into thinking that walking away from a
failed startup where you learned and grew as a person is somehow a worse
outcome than spending your years in a job that is more "secure" but with a
narrower breadth of skill development or ownership over your work.

