Loading...
Answers
MenuShould a digital marketing freelancer with a growing business ($300K) leave their own business to join an ad agency for 20% stake and $100K salary?
This question has no further details.
Answers
The freelancer is on the right track, and they should stick with their own stuff.
They may be essentially looking at your client base. Digital marketing contracts are usually long term. They need a business development guy as they are not able to advertise and grow using the new age tools and tech. Look at the synergies and the levels of independence. Will you have only the delivery responsibility or marketing/ sales as well? Are they talking about digi mktg division with you as a head? What will happen if you are not able to generate any revenue?
If money and security is the sole object, then it may more sense to take ad agency gig. But if freedom and a bigger stake in the overall direction and of company is a priority then staying the course as a freelancer may make more sense.
To me there are other factors that would come into play more than money. I imagine a Freelancer growing a business (300K) is probably spending much of their free time focused on a business and not much free time to enjoy life. There is also the instability of running a growing business which would play into it as a factor. Working for an Ad Agency might reduce those stressed, but at a 100K salary I imagine there will be other work/life balances and requests.
I don't think there is an easy answer and it all depends on the personal and professional goals of the individual. I know that's not a concrete answer, but hopefully it does help.
Keep in mind if money is what you are comparing, the financial health and opportunity at the ad agency needs to be examined closely as well. 20% of a small agency vs 20% of a large agency is very different.
You also need to consider how much control you like to have with your work, at 20%, you may not have the final say anymore. Consider whether or not your potential future partners have the same value and see if its a fit.
Ask yourself where do you want o be and what kind of future do you see yourself in? Like all good decisions, start with your objectives!
Hope this helps!
Jennifer Ping
Freelancer means freedom, free from your boss and free to do what you loved to do. Don't let money take over your live, money will come by it self.
If you have a freelance practice with a circulatory valuation north or upto 300k then it's time to turn into an Agency yourself. Don't join the Agency unless your gut says you should. You should realize that you've done really well so far, something is working. Identify what that something is and nurture it. It is the secret to your continued success.
As always, however, the decision is upto none but you.
All the very best.
Impossible to say. Make a list of pros and cons. Pick the best option in balance.
Then examine your gut reaction to the choice. If you feel satisfied, then go with whatever you chose. If you feel disappointed by the outcome, go with the opposite of the rational choice.
And if you're just not sure, go on a vacation and start over tabulating the pros and cons when you have a better tan.
So many great thoughts around this ... the only thing I'd add is that a decision around solely financial principles will fail in the long term. Systems are more important than goals and Core Values alignment are more important in the long term than short or medium term promised or proposed financial gains.
Looking for Core Value alignment first empowers the freelancer to truly create synergy and leverage in the new relationship. Gaining 20% in something that has synergistic value in addition to a reasonable base may make sense if the partners are in great alignment. If not, there's no long term value to the relationship.
Tactically, the freelancer should look at the agency's systems and processes to ensure they are efficient and that there's further operational value in the alignment of their priorities.
I've written a great deal on core value alignment and you can find blogs and podcasts here: http://wisenapkin.com/tag/core-values/
Good luck and let me know if I can help.
You always have more potential when doing your own thing -- the question is whether you're able to execute.
So I'd almost always say STICK WITH YOUR OWN THING! Except we all have different goals at different points in our lives. If, for example, you want to shift your focus to family, going back to a day job might allow you to do that (in some ways) better than growing your own biz.
As someone who faced a very similar question, I need to ask first, how old are you? If you are young, energetic, and entrepreneurial (as it seems you are), it is extremely likely you will reach a point when you do not wish to be " in charge, all the time" and you will yearn for having colleagues and partners at your level, to help carry the load. As someone who was independent, then part of a large team/business, and now is independent again, I can assure you there are pros and cons to each. I would strongly suggest using a weighted factor analysis that would help you assess objectively which option is better. Its a simple excel tool, happy to show it to you. Wouldn't take more than 15 min.
Related Questions
-
What is a good scope of work for a marketing and PR department?
Build a body of work in the form of a blog. Much depends on the size and scope of your company, but branded journalism can really make a huge difference.....AW
-
Whats the best way to find commission sales reps?
This is not my specialty, however, I have been in your position many many times -- maybe this will help. If the product is in-tangible, then look for JV partners on the Internet. Try to find an expert that deals with these JV opportunities (like me). If the product is physical, then look for sales organizations that have networks of sales people across the country. You do the deal with the organization and the independent network of sales people sells your product. It's a sweet setup if you can negotiate a margin that works for everyone. Hope that helps - Cheers - NickNP
-
How much equity should I ask as a CMO in a startup?
Greater risk = greater equity. How likely is this to fail or just break even? If you aren't receiving salary yet are among 4-6 non-founders with equivalent sweat investment, all of whom are lower on the totem pole than the two founders, figure out: 1) Taking into account all likely outcomes, what is the most likely outcome in terms of exit? (ex: $10MM.) Keep in mind that 90%+ of all tech startups fail (Allmand Law study), and of those that succeed 88% of M&A deals are under $100MM. Startups that exit at $1B+ are so rare they are called "unicorns"... so don't count on that, no matter how exciting it feels right now. 2) Figure out what 1% equity would give you in terms of payout for the most likely exit. For example, a $10MM exit would give you $100k for every 1% you own. 3) Decide what the chance is that the startup will fail / go bankrupt / get stuck at a $1MM business with no exit in sight. (According to Allman Law's study, 10% stay in business - and far fewer than that actually exit). 4) Multiply the % chance of success by the likely outcome if successful. Now each 1% of equity is worth $10k. You could get lucky and have it be worth millions, or it could be worth nothing. (With the hypothetical numbers I'm giving here, including the odds, you are working for $10k per 1% equity received if the most likely exit is $10MM and the % chance of failure is 90%.) 5) Come up with a vesting path. Commit to one year, get X equity at the end. If you were salaried, the path would be more like 4 years, but since it's free you deserve instant equity as long as you follow through for a reasonable period of time. 6) Assuming you get agreement in writing from the founders, what amount of $ would you take in exchange for 12 months of free work? Now multiply that by 2 to factor in the fact that the payout would be far down the road, and that there is risk. 7) What percentage share of equity would you need in order to equal that payout on exit? 8) Multiply that number by 2-3x to account for likely dilution over time. 9) If the founders aren't willing to give you that much equity in writing, then it's time to move on! If they are, then decide whether you're willing to take the risk in exchange for potentially big rewards (and of course, potentially empty pockets). It's a fascinating topic with a lot of speculation involved, so if you want to discuss in depth, set up a call with me on Clarity. Hope that helps!RD
-
How has Uber grown so fast?
Obviously, they do the fundamentals well. Good brand. Good experience. Good word of mouth. Good PR. Etc. Etc. But after my interview with Ryan Graves, the head of Global Operations at Uber (https://www.growthhacker.tv/ryan-graves), it became clear that they are operationally advanced and this is a huge part of their success. I'll explain. Uber isn't just a single startup, it's essentially dozens of startups rolled into one because every time they enter a new city they have to establish themselves from essentially nothing (except whatever brand equity has reached the city ahead of them). This means finding/training drivers, marketing to consumers, and building out local staff to manage operations for that city. This is where Ryan Graves comes in. He has a protocol of everything that must be done, and in what order, and by who, to ensure the best chance of success in a new city. So how has Uber grown so fast? Essentially, they figured out how to grow in one locale and were relentless about refining their launch process to recreate that initial success over and over in new cities. No plan works for every city, and they've had to adapt in many situations, but it is still a driving factor for their success.BT
-
How was SnapChat able to grow so quickly?
I'm answering your question assuming that you hope to be able to replicate it's own success in your own mobile app. There are a couple of factors responsible for it's growth that are instructive to anyone building a mobile app. "Leveraging the intimacy and privacy of the mobile phone." We now have an *intimate* relationship with our phone like no other device in the history of technology. Every internet company that started before around 2010 has built their core interactions around "the old web" one which was accessed primarily via a browser on a computer. Companies that start with a clean slate, should be building their interactions around how to do whatever the app is supposed to do while leveraging what is unique to people's relationship to their mobile devices. Photo-sharing has become a core part of the way we communicate now. Snapchat built something that provided an experience that leveraged the feeling of privacy and intimacy that is unique to mobile. "Provided an escape from the "maturity" of other online services." Too many parents, aunts, uncles and other "old people" have encroached into the social networks of teens and young people. As a result, they've had a desire to find places to express themselves in places inaccessible by older generations. An important distinction is that it's not just parents and relatives that young people are trying to avoid, but also employers & colleges who are increasingly using "mature" social networks to review applicants. "Leveraged PR even bad PR" The fact that the app got so much press about it being used to sext was perfect PR for the company, as it essentially reinforced the brand experience that it has today. Essentially, "if it's safe enough to send a sext, it's safe for any kind of communication I want to have." And although the safety and security of Snapchat is actually not as advertised, it still enjoys the reputation of having less impact than any primarily web-based service. Building a successful mobile application is one of the hardest challenges to face designers, programmers and entrepreneurs in the history of writing software. Happy to talk to you if you're considering building a mobile app, about what I've learned about the "table stakes" for success.TW
the startups.com platform
Copyright © 2025 Startups.com. All rights reserved.