ta08152016 | 9 years ago | on: Splitting Equity Among Founders
Had to create a throwaway account for this one. I was involved in a founder split that was wildly uneven years ago. The justification sounded good that the beginning, but the imbalance became more and more evident as things went on. Ultimately, one co-founder left, one was bitter all the time, and one ended up with a significantly disproportionate share of the company. It just didn't work at all. Seibel is right here, start with equal shares, and only modify if there is a significant imbalance. All the justifications you can come up with at the beginning of a company just aren't able to take into account what will happen 7-10 years from then. Keep it fair, or you risk introducing a whole load of extra baggage to an already impossible task, right at the beginning.