Hacker News new | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Unbelievable. An experienced & successful entrepreneur would take on an unknown cofounder without any kind of vesting schedule + cliff. Doesn't make any sense to me. I am not buying Jeremy's side at all.



Yeah, but if that is true the agreement should be in writing. So I think Kyle should be able to easily prove Jeremy wrong if they did have a vesting schedule. Edit: according to Sam Altman's blog post they never got around to signing employment agreements.


I can't see how there is any possible explanation of the agreed upon facts that doesn't paint Kyle as making a horrible mistake with respect to ownership rights.

He submitted a YC application that listed them as co-founders, and has no paperwork showing the Jeremy gave up his share (whatever it might have been).

So, the only explanation I can come up with is that " An experienced & successful entrepreneur" took on "an unknown cofounder" without proper paperwork.

That's a pretty surprising set of circumstances, but it seems pretty clear that it happened.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: