5 ms·
For reasons the above commenter has already mentioned. Most founder either want to run a profitable business or make their way to a big exit. Company valued at
by MathCodeLove 4y ago
For reasons the above commenter has already mentioned.
Most founder either want to run a profitable business or make their way to a big exit. Company valued at 10b? Great, sell or IPO. If the founder really realized that there was no profit ever to be made and genuinely didnt believe in the future of the company then the best move for their own self-interest would be to sell and gtfo.
Not only if your premise impractical, but it's inherently illogical for your antagonist to act as you imagine.
- szundi 4y agoIf the first commenter is naive, then this is even more so. Most people love to be looked up to, loved, payed nicely. They won’t quit.
- taneq 4y agoFalse dichotomy. “No profits ever” and “unicorn IPO” are not the only two options and if the latter isn’t on the cards, “fat executive compensation and cocktail lunches while pretending you’re on the way to the latter” looks pretty good.
- hinkley 4y agoAs someone who has been acquired prior to profitability a few times, there are subtler variations at play here. There may be avenues to profitability that the founders have no stomach for. Their sense of ego will let them do a lot but there are things they won't do. There is some honor among thieves and being willing to exploit people is very different from outright abuse. There are much worse people out there in the world to have as a boss. This sort is merely run of the mill. The new owners have a different threshold, which you are about to learn. The exchange of money is fresh in their mind, they don't have a history with the employees, and they have a story in their head about how they can turn this money into a pile twice as high. They may well get the company to profitability, but if things were a little ridiculous before they may be a proper circus now. There's some magic algorithm they use for figuring out options and vesting periods to retain staff, and there's some inflection point where if you stay this long then you get the most extra money per month. This is the trap they have set for you. It's practically an optical illusion, which you can only see once you've stepped past it. You will underestimate the relative value of month 3 versus month 13, and you will forget that 6 months may be worth $6N dollars but 5 months is worth $0. And so with one month to go you will be willing to put up with 4x as much bullshit, forgetting that most of that extra money was already buying the last 5 months. In effect, double spending your bonus. The moment you leave you will wonder why you didn't do it ages ago, even as you are spending the cash. If it seems like you should stay for 2 years, then you will probably be happier with 1. If 3 years, then 2 years, maybe 18 months if there are increments smaller than a year. Of course, nobody can really tell you this, because your brain will keep asking you 'what if I had stayed' until it's happened to you at least once. But I think maybe you can tell people not to repeat that mistake. Trust your instincts from last time. This one won't be different.