12/21 http://techcompanypay.com
Yahooers in Sunnyvale don't seem to average 170K/year.
\_ Googlers average $104k/yr? Uh huh.
\_ what is it suppose to be?
\_ link:preview.tinyurl.com/a36ejr4
Google Sr. Software Engineer in Sunnyvale averages $193k in total pay,
according to Glassdoor. This is about right. Perhaps they mean all
Googlers, including Janitors and Bus Drivers.
Google Sr. Software Engineer in Sunnyvale averages $193k in
total pay, according to Glassdoor. This is about right.
Perhaps they mean all Googlers, including Janitors and Bus
Drivers.
\_ Gee, I'm a Principal SW Engineer at a startup and I'm
making only $128k/yr.
\_ Sounds like you're probably relatively young, then. A
lot of this also depends on how much experience you.
If you have two employees with identical job titles, the
one with 15 years of experience is going to be making
much more than the one with 7 (even when they start
passing out senior-sounding titles to the younger
engineers)
\_ How much equity are you getting? That might be worth
even more than your salary. I am very senior and
working at a startup and making about the same. But
also getting lots of equity.
\_ When I joined 6 years ago, I got 0.25% ISO which has
been diluted to 0.09% at present. Combining with
the bonuses throughout the years, my total ISO now is
0.16%. -- PP, class of '93
\_ That's not a lot of equity. If you're class of
'93, you should have enough experience to command
a higher salary than that. .16 isn't a generous
enough grant to make up for it. That's "junior
engineer hired after round C" equity. The next
time you switch jobs, ask for a hell of a lot more
money (like another $30-40k).
\_ Depends on the companies valuation. Any idea
what it is worth? 0.16% of $100M isn't that great.
0.16% of $1B is awesome. -PP
0.16% of $1B is awesome.
\_ The equity percentages you should expect are
based on what stage you join the company, and
how senior you are. The valuation matters
when you cash in, but it doesn't really
provide any guidance for evaluating an offer.
And to your point, it's even *worse* if the
company is worth a billion, because he got
ripped off even more.
\_ In what world is an option on $160k of
stock worth more than an option on $1.6M?
\_ What I'm saying is that the percent
equity you should expect is independent
of the company's valuation. If a more
appropriate amount of equity would be
about .5%, then his poor initial
negotiation caused him to miss out on
even more money if the company sells for
one billion than if it sells for $100
million. I'm obviously not saying .16%
of $100 million is more than .16% of
$1 billion.
\_ I think that you are incorrect. So
does Fred Wilson up there, but then
again he would think that, right? Do
you have a handy dandy chart that tells
people how much equity they should
ask for given the funding round the
company is at and the employees level?
Absent that, most of this is just talk.
\_ At this point, I'm pretty sure I'm
being trolled. Or you deserve what
you (don't) get. Want to find
some guidance? Google it yourself.
You might want to look at typical
capitalization tables while you're
at it.
\_ In other words, you are talking
out your ass and don't want to
admit being caught at it. Cap
tables have nothing to do with
what rank and file (or even
executive) employees should get
in equity compensation.
\_ Oookay, Mr. I Can't Google:
http://thinkspace.com/how-to-divide-equity-to-startup-founders-advisors-and-employees
Scroll down to the second
table, that looks about
right for round A. And your
take on capitalization tables
is just precious.
\_ From your own link:
"The one number you should
know about your equity
grant is the percent of
the company you are being
granted (in options,
shares, whatever – it
doesn’t matter – just
the % matters)." Oddly
enough, this guy doesn't
seem to care much about
the cap table either.
\_ The cap table
describes the larger
ecosystem, of which
your option grant is
a small part. It is
not necessary to
evaluate an offer,
neither is it
unrelated. I directed
your attention to
*one table* on this
page. I don't care
about the rest of it.
If he says "only the
percent equity
matters", that's a
bit naive, as it
ignores the
preference the VCs
have taken. It was
true 15 years ago, but
not now.
\_ It was the same then
but they accoplish-
this via other, more
nefarious means. At
least this is up
front.
\_ What should it be for
round B, round C, etc?
Do you have any insight?
This is actually quite useful, thanks. _/
I guess I did all right then, since
I got this much in a company that
has just completed it's D round -!PP
\_ The game has changed. You might want to read up on
preference in startup term sheets, and why it means
that your (common) equity probably won't be worth
much (if anything), even if someone does buy your
startup. Example: in the $500 million purchase of
Xen by Citrix, the VCs split 380 milllion of the
purchase amount, while the rank and file were left
splitting $120 million. So if you're sitting there
thinking "I've got .5% equity"...you probably don't.
And when the VCs preference (not their investment)
covers more than the purchase <DEAD>price...com<DEAD>mon
shareholders get nothing. Working for equity at a
startup today is *not* like the 90s.
\_ Yeah, I had to learn about this stuff before I
accpeted the offer. I am ready to take the risk
that I get nothing if the value of the company
does not increase. It is in general a bad idea
to get a job for a company that is failing, but
especially bad if much of your compensation is
in equity. I assume that I get 0.5% of the value
added *after* I join. Does that seem about right
to you? Thanks for the advice.
\_ Preference describes the extent to which the
preferred shareholders (the VCs) get paid more
than the common shareholders (the employees
who got options) if and when the place sells.
It has nothing to do with whether the
valuation is going up or down, though the
preference is likely to increase (get worse
for you) across a down round (a funding round
where the valuation is lower than the previous
round's valuation). However, if you have
onerous preference conditions in round A,
they'll still be there after round B, even if
B is an up round. In fact, the VCs who come
in in round B will get that same preference
over you, most likely.
The amount of equity you have is the size of
your grant divided by the number of shares
outstanding. You should be able to find out
both those numbers to evaulate an offer. Run
from any company that won't tell you the
shares outstanding. The percent of equity you
have at the time of your offer is *not*
guaranteed across time, and *will* go down.
Additional shares will get created during a
funding round (dilution), which means you own
less of the company. You should expect an
additional grant at that time to compensate,
but they're unlikely to give you enough to
keep you whole.
And even if they did, preference means you
probably don't really have what you think you
have.
\_ Here is Fred Wilson's take on the topic.
I think he does a better job of explaining
it than you did.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/alm43rs |
http://csua.com/feed/