16 karma · joined April 17, 2007
Whilst I do think that it's good to have a broad view of how things fit together, knowing what every line of code is doing says to me that you are either working on incredibly trivial code, and/or you're not using existing, well-tested libraries as much as you could be.
Granted, there are some common sense aspects that are slam dunks (c'mon, version control, why wouldn't you use it) but a lot of it still favours serious software where all the engineers wear dark suits and ties and do big design up front.
Most startups would run out of time and money just getting to level 2 CMMi compliance before they even started to really cut any code.
Obviously, the longer you hang around, the lower the actual return you get for sacrificing the extra $20k/pa you could get elsewhere. If you wanted to take an even gloomier view, you could calculate the yield on investing $20k/pa, take into account consumer price indexes and any rising market rates. Oh and don't forget the potential for dilution.
Unless your employer is going out in many multiples of $10mil, it's probably better to take market rates elsewhere, and use the extra $20k to invest/bootstrap your own startup on the side :)
The question that has to be asked is "why does he want to raise the VC money?" Unless you need big money up front to build this thing (and you don't seem to think that's the case), I get the feeling that he desperately wants to be seen as an entrepreneur.
Entrepreneurs market the hell out of their product, but "Wantrepreneurs" just market the hell out of themselves.
Or to put it another way, is he in love with the product, or in love with the idea that he's an entrepreneur?
(sure there are exceptions to the rule; "Google, it's like AltaVista...")
I can think of two colleagues who were critical in me ditching wage slavery and becoming a freelancer, one is a programmer, the other is a CTO but started as a network guy. I didn't learn much from them about being a developer, but I sure learned a lot about being a professional.
Colour me bitter, but if I'm going to work for peanuts, I'd rather do my own thing and have more control than I would as an optioned employee.
Minor equity (as opposed to the founder's equity) in a company that isn't going to flip (something built 37signals style) is of limited use to me, unless it's wildly profitable and paying out a considerable share of the profits.
If you can't sell me on your idea and business case, there's no point in talking about 1-4 above.
I'm not saying that equity compensation isn't worth considering, just that for every startup that flips and pays out a nice chunk, there are plenty that don't.