this is all sam
Conversation
I am curious: do you think that payout is reasonable?
No employee of any company gets a deal like that.
1
1
I wasn't commenting on the payout, I was commenting on the fact that Scott had just unambiguously lied and that's not ok.
2
4
Yep. I’m not here to comment on that.
As a separate point. I’m curious if you think this is a reasonable proposal?
1
3
In general what % of a project do you think is reasonable to go to founders?
I mean if your answer is '0%, founders shouldn't get rewarded', that's fine, but wanted to check if that's true, or otherwise what % you'd say.
3
2
I think if founders end up with 20% of a public company that’s great.
For protocols it feels like sub 10% is more optimal.
For 2 weeks work that largely involved forking others’ work, it feels like a lot less.
What if it was 100k sushi vesting over 5 years with a 1 year cliff?
3
4
In public companies, vesting is often 3 years (sometimes 4 or 5), but with a new grant usually each year. This ties people to vesting schedules, theoretically in perpetuity, if the stock continues to go up. $1.25 m for an idea is too much. Vest it over 3 years min.
1
Please tell me what % of SUSHI you think it should be. Please phrase in %.
But totally agree on the vesting!
It’s very hard to just say a simple %. Things I would consider are a) ensuring that the original allocations are commiserate with work performed b) setting up a system, so that early contributors aren’t disproportionately incentivized, at the expense of later contributors
1
2
C) potentially a system for determining whether goals/objectives are met. I would agree with Richard, that 10% seems sufficient, but not just for early founders. There was a weird way that ETH was awarded, that lead to disproportionate compensation, for work performed and risk.
1