Comments on: Founders, Ownership and Prenuptials http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2009/08/18/founders-ownership-and-stock-options/ Entrepreneur turned VC Sun, 01 Aug 2010 00:25:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=9157 By: Hiring at a Startup? Know Thy Weaknesses | CloudAve http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2009/08/18/founders-ownership-and-stock-options/comment-page-1/#comment-865 Hiring at a Startup? Know Thy Weaknesses | CloudAve Sun, 13 Dec 2009 07:51:25 +0000 http://bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=765#comment-865 [...] on this post about The Most Common Early Stage Startup Mistakes and again in this post covering how to implement startup prenuptials.  If the topic is important to you and you haven’t read these posts I think they’ll be [...] [...] on this post about The Most Common Early Stage Startup Mistakes and again in this post covering how to implement startup prenuptials.  If the topic is important to you and you haven’t read these posts I think they’ll be [...]

]]> By: Doing It Right the First Time: The 15 Most Common, but Avoidable, Mistakes Made by High Growth Start-ups | VC Deal Lawyer http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2009/08/18/founders-ownership-and-stock-options/comment-page-1/#comment-864 Doing It Right the First Time: The 15 Most Common, but Avoidable, Mistakes Made by High Growth Start-ups | VC Deal Lawyer Tue, 08 Dec 2009 04:40:52 +0000 http://bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=765#comment-864 [...] at formation.  For some further info, see both of these articles from Mark Suster regarding Founder Prenups and Founder [...] [...] at formation.  For some further info, see both of these articles from Mark Suster regarding Founder Prenups and Founder [...]

]]> By: Hiring at a Startup? Know Thy Weaknesses http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2009/08/18/founders-ownership-and-stock-options/comment-page-1/#comment-863 Hiring at a Startup? Know Thy Weaknesses Wed, 02 Dec 2009 03:07:34 +0000 http://bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=765#comment-863 [...] on this post about The Most Common Early Stage Startup Mistakes and again in this post covering how to implement startup prenuptials.  If the topic is important to you and you haven’t read these posts I think they’ll be [...] [...] on this post about The Most Common Early Stage Startup Mistakes and again in this post covering how to implement startup prenuptials.  If the topic is important to you and you haven’t read these posts I think they’ll be [...]

]]> By: msuster http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2009/08/18/founders-ownership-and-stock-options/comment-page-1/#comment-866 msuster Mon, 07 Sep 2009 21:51:12 +0000 http://bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=765#comment-866 Ha, excellent visual. Yes, I believe in smaller founding teams. It's controversial and most companies have 2 founders if not 3,4 so I try to be sensitive by not shouting louder. But I usually tell these people privately to start their next company by themselves and add "co-founders" later. Thanks for your input. Ha, excellent visual. Yes, I believe in smaller founding teams. It's controversial and most companies have 2 founders if not 3,4 so I try to be sensitive by not shouting louder. But I usually tell these people privately to start their next company by themselves and add “co-founders” later. Thanks for your input.

]]> By: msuster http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2009/08/18/founders-ownership-and-stock-options/comment-page-1/#comment-13426 msuster Mon, 07 Sep 2009 21:51:12 +0000 http://bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=765#comment-13426 Ha, excellent visual. Yes, I believe in smaller founding teams. It's controversial and most companies have 2 founders if not 3,4 so I try to be sensitive by not shouting louder. But I usually tell these people privately to start their next company by themselves and add "co-founders" later. Thanks for your input. Ha, excellent visual. Yes, I believe in smaller founding teams. It's controversial and most companies have 2 founders if not 3,4 so I try to be sensitive by not shouting louder. But I usually tell these people privately to start their next company by themselves and add “co-founders” later. Thanks for your input.

]]> By: msuster http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2009/08/18/founders-ownership-and-stock-options/comment-page-1/#comment-862 msuster Mon, 07 Sep 2009 16:51:12 +0000 http://bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=765#comment-862 Ha, excellent visual. Yes, I believe in smaller founding teams. It's controversial and most companies have 2 founders if not 3,4 so I try to be sensitive by not shouting louder. But I usually tell these people privately to start their next company by themselves and add "co-founders" later. Thanks for your input. Ha, excellent visual. Yes, I believe in smaller founding teams. It's controversial and most companies have 2 founders if not 3,4 so I try to be sensitive by not shouting louder. But I usually tell these people privately to start their next company by themselves and add “co-founders” later. Thanks for your input.

]]> By: eran shir http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2009/08/18/founders-ownership-and-stock-options/comment-page-1/#comment-13424 eran shir Mon, 07 Sep 2009 10:06:30 +0000 http://bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=765#comment-13424 PS, just found your blog (through Fred) and love it. Nice work. PS, just found your blog (through Fred) and love it. Nice work.

]]> By: eran shir http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2009/08/18/founders-ownership-and-stock-options/comment-page-1/#comment-13425 eran shir Mon, 07 Sep 2009 10:06:05 +0000 http://bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=765#comment-13425 Mark, you shouldn't be shy about this point, it's very important and in fact critical to a start-up's success. A founding team should be small (I'd say ideally and at most 2). The pre-nup is one side of it, but there is another reason, potentially even more important. When you have a large founding team, in the early days the founders are a huge percentage of the workforce. In an 18 months old company with 15 employees, a founding team of 4 is more than 25%. The problem with that is that even if one of them is the CEO, typically he will have much less management leverage on them than he has on other employees. They might be his buddies, or he feels one of them could've just as easily turn out to be the CEO. It's hard not to look at them as peers. And then it's much harder to hold them accountable and force an objective metrics driven management process. <br><br>So I would say, get a partner to bounce ideas and build together in the garage (it's hard not to get mad alone), but keep it at that. And when you choose one, remember the other side of the pre-nup metaphore - choosing a co-founder is the closest thing to choosing a spouse. Don't be Brittney Spears. Mark, you shouldn't be shy about this point, it's very important and in fact critical to a start-up's success. A founding team should be small (I'd say ideally and at most 2). The pre-nup is one side of it, but there is another reason, potentially even more important. When you have a large founding team, in the early days the founders are a huge percentage of the workforce. In an 18 months old company with 15 employees, a founding team of 4 is more than 25%. The problem with that is that even if one of them is the CEO, typically he will have much less management leverage on them than he has on other employees. They might be his buddies, or he feels one of them could've just as easily turn out to be the CEO. It's hard not to look at them as peers. And then it's much harder to hold them accountable and force an objective metrics driven management process.

So I would say, get a partner to bounce ideas and build together in the garage (it's hard not to get mad alone), but keep it at that. And when you choose one, remember the other side of the pre-nup metaphore – choosing a co-founder is the closest thing to choosing a spouse. Don't be Brittney Spears.

]]> By: eran shir http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2009/08/18/founders-ownership-and-stock-options/comment-page-1/#comment-860 eran shir Mon, 07 Sep 2009 05:06:30 +0000 http://bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=765#comment-860 PS, just found your blog (through Fred) and love it. Nice work. PS, just found your blog (through Fred) and love it. Nice work.

]]> By: eran shir http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2009/08/18/founders-ownership-and-stock-options/comment-page-1/#comment-861 eran shir Mon, 07 Sep 2009 05:06:05 +0000 http://bothsidesofthetable.com/?p=765#comment-861 Mark, you shouldn't be shy about this point, it's very important and in fact critical to a start-up's success. A founding team should be small (I'd say ideally and at most 2). The pre-nup is one side of it, but there is another reason, potentially even more important. When you have a large founding team, in the early days the founders are a huge percentage of the workforce. In an 18 months old company with 15 employees, a founding team of 4 is more than 25%. The problem with that is that even if one of them is the CEO, typically he will have much less management leverage on them than he has on other employees. They might be his buddies, or he feels one of them could've just as easily turn out to be the CEO. It's hard not to look at them as peers. And then it's much harder to hold them accountable and force an objective metrics driven management process. <br><br>So I would say, get a partner to bounce ideas and build together in the garage (it's hard not to get mad alone), but keep it at that. And when you choose one, remember the other side of the pre-nup metaphore - choosing a co-founder is the closest thing to choosing a spouse. Don't be Brittney Spears. Mark, you shouldn't be shy about this point, it's very important and in fact critical to a start-up's success. A founding team should be small (I'd say ideally and at most 2). The pre-nup is one side of it, but there is another reason, potentially even more important. When you have a large founding team, in the early days the founders are a huge percentage of the workforce. In an 18 months old company with 15 employees, a founding team of 4 is more than 25%. The problem with that is that even if one of them is the CEO, typically he will have much less management leverage on them than he has on other employees. They might be his buddies, or he feels one of them could've just as easily turn out to be the CEO. It's hard not to look at them as peers. And then it's much harder to hold them accountable and force an objective metrics driven management process.

So I would say, get a partner to bounce ideas and build together in the garage (it's hard not to get mad alone), but keep it at that. And when you choose one, remember the other side of the pre-nup metaphore – choosing a co-founder is the closest thing to choosing a spouse. Don't be Brittney Spears.

]]>