I think early stage startups have the lowest expected value (realization * probability) for non founders. Probably because of survivor bias: we all like to talk of the fortunes made by the first AMZN / FB / GOOG employees, but don’t see the thousands that spun the wheel and losthttps://twitter.com/jasoncrawford/status/1179206722071621632 …
-
-
Characterizing my point, as I'm getting DMs re this and realizing calibration is uneven :) I think 1-2% for each of the first 10 hires is fine (~3% for 1st, who should be very strong)
-
Unsure the market would accurately reflect EVs, even at current thickness — humans are bad at thinking of low probability, high impact events (hence spending on lottery) which can result in systemic price distortions at large scale
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The best analysis of the “you’re allowed to quit” valuation of options (ie a call on the company with only salary as downside) is:https://www.benkuhn.net/optopt
-
best analysis I know of**
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
+1 I think the only “weirdness” in the market is that most startups at the same stage seem to pay roughly the same. Shouldn’t we be seeing the worse startups paying more, and the more promising ones less? Maybe it’s too difficult for employees to judge.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
That's a terrible take,
@patrickcThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not all startups are great companies or learning environments
IMO there’s a very high compounded opportunity cost for early employees at non-exceptional startups partly because of how many wheels they have to kludgely reinvent and lack of learning from senior peopleThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.