Hacker News Reader

Comment by joatmon-snoo | Hacker News Reader

I'm so confused.

You think that the startup employee, who's placed a bet on their own personal value, doesn't deserve sympathy, but the VC, who gets to hedge their bets, does?

View on HN

Both parties, investors and employees, should get sympathy and remediation. Employees have been paid a salary all along, but should still get a proper severance if the company is shut down. Investors who gave Theranos >$300M in 2015 also have a right to get some of their investment back if the company is hopeless. The investors are shareholders in the company and the board and CEO need to consider their interests along with the employees' interests.

I didn't say that. I said the VC is putting more skin in the game. Sucks for both, but were paid quite well for what we do and can walk away whenever we like.

Is "were" supposed to be "we're"? If it is, who's "we"? Not all startups pay "quite well" and there are varying levels of risk employees take. Some are certainly more extreme than others.

I think skin in the game is proportional to net worth... as a percentage of net worth, I'd bet employees put more skin in the game.

If some unfortunate VC tied 100% of their assets in this, which was tied to 100% of some direct persons money, then that'd suck for sure. Not likely though.

>I didn't say that. I said the VC is putting more skin in the game.

No, they don't. They are putting more money in the game, but way less skin -- since with "skin" we usually refer to actual personal consequences (it doesn't get any more personal that our own literal skin).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com