Founding a funded startup which doesn’t work out largely does not and should not irreversibly damage the founders’ finances. We should stop implying this is routine and stop valorizing courses of action which increase likelihood of it happening, like not taking salary.
-
-
Then you do whatever comes next, which is possibly a breather (at your option), possibly immediately doing another thing, or possibly getting a job. The direct economic consequences are within normal tolerances for the gainfully employed professional you have been since taking $.
Show this thread -
“Is this different for bootstrappers?” Complicated, but very important to realize that when you sold 10%+ of your future outcomes to professional investors one of the things they were very explicitly buying was 100% of the downside risk.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
So you want founders to have a deal with zero risk, zero opportunity cost (say the salary is equal to a corp one) but still have a good chance of a huge or very huge win? Perhaps they’d need to be funded by the FED directly
-
It’s interesting to think about this from a supply/demand perspective — in today’s climate, it’s possible to argue capital is a commodity and good, fundable founders are scarce, which may make it easier for the norms
@patio11 is suggesting to take hold
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.