madanella

Some people have vision and others don't. Especially in small companies it's easy to find those who would rather own the proverbial 100% of nothing. Or 51% of something small instead of 10% of something great. In capital-intensive startups, like JetBlue and some oil operations, founders are known to raise lots of cash and end up with less than 10% by the time the private rounds are done.

Look at most major public companies, rarely do the founders own more than about 15% by that point. A lot of that is from dilution, from sharing the equity. I would propose that almost none of them would ever have gotten that far if they were afraid to share equity in order to get their project done, the right way, by the right people.

I'm curious, what do you think of stock options for common employees?

From my experience, share grants, vesting and equity sharing are some of the hardest parts of the incorporation process and decision making. It's good to get as much thinking around them as possible because they are CRITICAL.

I agree that it takes more work, it also takes more work for entrepreneurs to be transparent, honest and open. It's always easier to hide. At least it will always feel easier and safer.

VC's almost unanimously claim that they like what they do because they get to be involved in helping entrepreneurs succeed. I don't doubt that to be true. They could be more helpful with a bit of effort put into providing true, honest feedback to entrepreneurs.

It makes sense that hope would drive the desire to start a project and that fear would drive the desire to complete it. I think hope is harder to rely on, but it's better in the end. Fear tends to become negative in many ways.

I think all entrepreneurs exist with both motivations constantly in flux.

Here is a funny post that disagrees a bit.

http://lrk.livejournal.com/24906.html

I think there's a way to be like Simon but without being rude. Just give direct and honest feedback. What's wrong with transparency?

Competition proves (at least at some level) the validity of your idea. Do it in a different city. Join their team. Build something that complements what they do. Or just do it better.

http://poignantguide.net/ruby/ is one of the most entertaining writings I have read, not just out of technical books, overall. Highly recommended.

Rolling On Rails from OnLamp is a very quick and useful tutorial found here: http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2005/01/20/rails.html

This is the easiest and fastest way to get started: http://tryruby.hobix.com/

One important issue that seems to be missing from these discussions is that a lot of hiring is about internal team dynamics. The big fear I have is of people who don't want to hire employees that are smarter(broadest sense) than they are. One of the biggest benefits of working is the opportunity to work next to people you respect or enjoy.

For ambitious, smart people also known as 'A Players', it's not easy to provide them with an environment where they will feel challenged and inspired by their team members. But doing so greatly increases the likelihood of winning those hires. Why do so many 'A Players' want to work for Google? I believe that it's because there's a sense that other smart people work there. You get a network effect happening in the HR side of things. Think of reasons for attending Stanford and Harvard, it's not really about the quality of what will be taught but the assumed quality of the others in attendance.

I also highly recommend using Priceline for hotels. Especially in the bay area. We pay 28-45 dollars/night and often end up in 3.5-4 star hotels.