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

Do you read any of the latter in my argument above as to why liquidation preferences exist?

It seems to me that you built and eviscerated a strawman right in front of us.




I think the point the OP is trying to make is that the structure that you described, while great in protecting investors, seems pretty unfair when the startups do succeed. So while recouping the intitial investment preferentially sounds great, it shouldn’t be extended as far as giving the 20% investors the lions share of a successful exit before the people that actually built value.

The liquidity preferences could certainly be structured in a fairer fashion. Just because it’s currently structured this way doesn’t mean that it needs to be always or that it’s a great model ( it’s not unless you’re a VC, which is basically the point).


Imagine if you had a very deal-term savvy crew of engineer hires. They then proceed claim that "the compensation cut we have taken by working here directly offsets cash you would otherwise have to spend/raise. This should count as a capital investment and should therefore entitle us to 1x preference just like for the other investors have."

Would you think this is a legitimate claim?


Did you see where I said, "If you mean to say..." You could just have said, "No. I agree with you on that point."




Applications are open for YC Summer 2020

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

Search: