Yeah I know what you mean: the inclusivity paradox: the more something wants to include something else into it, the less that other thing wants to include itself back into it. Or rather, the more a thing wants to include another, the more there is a tendency for the other to want to exclude it.
To equalize matters, a price is set until the two are in balance and a relationship established.
If YC offered more cash and demanded less equity - ie. it lowered its price, then it would be seen as better value to those who would otherwise ignore it for having better alternatives... the Googlers.
Furthermore, in other areas of life, at some times people give up their soul connection to become corporate drones, not knowing the true value of their creativity - yet they think they are gaining...
Also, sometimes establishing a relationship can be mutually advantageous for both but for some reason one wants to 'extract more' - they have to feel they are getting the better deal always and anything they give up is a burden and unjustified. This can blow the deal for both, or else cause a poor relationship unlike the one originally envisaged.
To equalize matters, a price is set until the two are in balance and a relationship established.
If YC offered more cash and demanded less equity - ie. it lowered its price, then it would be seen as better value to those who would otherwise ignore it for having better alternatives... the Googlers.
Furthermore, in other areas of life, at some times people give up their soul connection to become corporate drones, not knowing the true value of their creativity - yet they think they are gaining... Also, sometimes establishing a relationship can be mutually advantageous for both but for some reason one wants to 'extract more' - they have to feel they are getting the better deal always and anything they give up is a burden and unjustified. This can blow the deal for both, or else cause a poor relationship unlike the one originally envisaged.