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

I agree, it seems crazy to say that it's fair to pay $n now and another people $n in a year or two if we're still around. Maybe he thinks that feels more fair than any solution that compensates with equity, but it doesn't seem like that's objectively fair.

I wonder if issuing convertible debt would be a good solution. So then you are giving equity to reward the founder for taking on the high risk of not being repaid, but you let future investment determine how much they should get.




Spolsky's premise is that people are not trying to get investment.

If founders want to fundraise then the question of equity vs salary is likely to be moot.




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

Search: