Loading...
Answers
MenuI need partners to help my company launch. How many shares and/or how much profit do I offer to get them?
They are willing to go salary free and on a 12 month contract and being very open to whatever I throw at them. Very cool guys and both seemingly committed, but of course I need to stay at the top (or close to the top) of their priority lists while also protecting my return.
Answers
There are several factors to consider:
1. Profit share does not have to equal equity. As an example, two people can agree to split net profits 50/50 even though the percentage of equity is split 60/40. Just get it in writing. So find out their expectations for long term income and equity. Are they expecting a share of net profits or just the ability to recoup their investment when you sell the business?
2. What value do they bring to your business? Are they funding? Are they bringing significant contacts or the ability to secure contracts? Are they helping with infrastructure or product development? What would you pay someone in salary with no equity to do the same exact thing?
3. Are the short term or long term? In other words, once they help you launch, do they continue to have value in building the company? Or, are they no longer needed?
There is no right answer to how you compensate them for helping you get started. But, try to look at all the value variables. Maybe that will help you identify what they are ultimately worth and what a fair, win-win offer would be. It sounds like they are very reasonable and you have a good opportunity to get their help for a reasonable compensation package.
Good luck.
If you would like to talk more about this at no charge, I offer a one time free call to new callers. Just use this link to schedule a call.
In your question a few key terms stand out:
1. Partners - be careful with this one. You will only have a few close partners, and not knowing the nature of the business, usually you need strong technology, management, and marketing partners. The more you divide the company between numerous partners, the less each one gets. In the early stages this sounds great, just remember the awareness that business, and life, is never equal. In this first year, some people will become more important than others in terms of the business.
I've seen companies with 3 partners getting 25% each, and the remaining 25% used for angel investors, employees, rewarding key freelancers and outside help, etc. Given that at each phase of investment - if you are raising capital - there will be dilution, and this gets each partners share much smaller. Bottom line, in the long run this equality failed to motivate the company to growth, with 1 partner sharing less than the other 2.
Contributions are rarely equal, and should be measured and reviewed.
2. While everyone says they will handle what you throw at them, the way you throw it and manage this will make a huge difference. Even with a contract, they are not getting paid, and you refer to getting on top of their priorities.
The only way to do this is keep them busy and get this generating revenue, and/or investment. Stumbles will affect your team, as well your management style - for good or bad. These team dynamics need to be truly dynamic, not static, so be sure to not only clearly outline who gets what early, with expectations in terms of time, and if possible set some performance standards to gaining this ownership of the company.
For example, if someone is developing a mobile app and knows they can get one going in 6 months, then based on that they get XX%. If they don't, and I mean it's a disaster and it's not working, you have a review to make sure that the deal works for both of you.
That said, you want to keep as much of the company between a few founders at most in my opinion. This gives you decision making strength, and also reflects the ones who aren't there for a contract, they are there for the 2-5 year run to build this into a real business.
Often 25% is set aside for angel investors, early help and employees; use this amount to first measure who is giving what to the company, and anything outside of that should be reserved only for long term partners in the business. This should be earned with some simple benchmarks so everyone has a sense of progression, because startups can move through months of vagueness, and keeping people on top of things, and also communicating well, is huge for your success.
This can be done in a fun way. Remember giving anyone more than 10% gives them serious input in the direction of the business, it doesn't sound like much but it is. You need to get along with them, and be able to work with them, that's the key part.
Obviously not knowing the product or business, exact estimates are tricky, ping me if I can help with specifics, glad to share some insights.
Hi,
First off, it really matters what the idea/concept is on which you want your two teammates to work on. They can say they would go with whatever, but trust me when I tell you, the intrinsic motivation can very quickly disappear if the idea/concept doesnt resonate with them or they didnt buy into it.
I had just a case like this and it usually ends up in a failure, sooner or later.
So when you are talking to them about being part of the team and making them partners (share distribution should be proportional to planned or perceived contribution by each team member), make it very clean they need to buy into the idea or commit to it long-term (6-12 months).
Also to increase the chance of success form the beginning, make sure to get on your team few passionate team members who have complementary skills. Try to avoid have two or more team members with same or overlapping skills. This can create a competition and conflict of interest from the onset - and you dont want that to happen in your core team.
Also getting their commitment to work for free, as partners or core team members, will test their "faith" or how much they bought into the idea/concept. If they ask for money early on or are doing your project just as another 3 or more projects, that you should be treating them as freelancers or part-timers, rather then core team members or partners.
This is a tough question. I would recommend evicting their input to the startup- some might be better for you to pay "cash" vs equity, specially if you feel the company will outgrow them quickly. You're in this for a business not friendship or charity, with that said when giving equity also consider vesting them and allocating % as they complete and it as the company grows... Be sure to keep stock set aside "owned" by the company itself for investors if you plan on raising funds. One thing I've done is having each partner chip back into the pot for investors as well from their assigned stock since it benefits all anyway... Call one of us here for more direct help evaluating your situation. :)
You pay for what they put in . focus on their efforts and pay by that
Related Questions
-
How can an ambitious entrepreneur succeed without the support of a capable team/staff?
One of the most toxic ways early stage companies fail is picking bad co-founders. Building a business is hard, and if you expect to ever make it anywhere worth mentioning, you're going to need help. Anything past a cute business that makes you a couple hundred bucks a month is going to have more work than you think. There is simply too much to do alone. My suggestion: Do your best to find someone you can work with. The best business leaders find ways to bring in diversity of thought. Assemble your team to fill in your gaps. If you think you have none, you're being dishonest with yourself. Take your time with the search. Picking a bad co-founder will take you nowhere fast, like you've seen. Start with Angellist, ask a lot of questions. Good luck!AK
-
How should I structure my real estate partnership?
I've been a commercial real estate broker for 5 years now and have ventured into a handful of business partnerships - some have worked and some have nearly ruined me. What I find, on a surface level, is that you must absolutely share the same VALUES and MISSION as your potential partner. Having even stake in the game also helps, as it avoids one partner eventually grabbing "the upper hand". If you are not bringing cash or equity to the table, be prepared to demonstrate how your hard work can be translated into $ value. If you have more detailed scenarios or questions, feel free to bounce them off me at anytime. Cheers! -S.SD
-
What is the right equity percentage for a potential technical partner?
You should always give someone what they deserve. Never more and never less. Most people don't know how to do this so they guess. They try to predict the future or they look for rules of thumb or they try other ways of guessing. Kind of like you are doing now. The best way to determine this is to consider one person's risk relative to others. When someone contributes to a startup company and doesn't get paid they are accepting risk. The value of that risk is equal to the fair market value of the contribution they made. For instance, if you could earn $100,000 a year doing whatever it is that you do and you do it for a startup without getting paid you are, in effect, risking $100,000 a year. Taking risk in a startup company is essentially betting on the future outcome of the startup. If you and I bet $10 on the same hand of Blackjack we are each betting the same amount and, therefore, each deserve exactly half the winnings (if any). So, the right way to split equity in a startup company is to keep track of what's been contributed, then perform this simple formula: Individual Ownership (%) = Individual Risk/Cumulative Risk The model changes over time as more contributions are made. Each day a person contribute their stake would change. This means that at any given time, no matter what changes, who joins or who leaves. Everyone always has exactly the ownership they deserve to have. Unlike traditional models that require us to predict the future, the relative risk model is based on easily observable values in the market. Everything has a fair market value. So, the answer to your question is simple. Add up the risk he has taken and divided it by all the risk taken by everyone (including you). Each person's share can be calculated this way and the total will always equal 100%. On day one, before he's done anything, his ownership will be 0%. As it should be. Over time, as he risks, his % will change based on relative risk. This is a perfect, unambiguous formula. Every other equity model lays the foundation for disputes later on. Only a relative risk model will give you the fair answer. I've written a book on this topic, called Slicing Pie, you may have a copy if you contact me through Clarity.fm or SlicingPie.com.MM
-
What is the best way for a fin-tech (mobile wallet) startup to approach a bank for an operational partnership? For eg. Stripe & Wells Fargo
Depending on the market, a bank is going to look at a combination of low-cost customer acquisition (particularly in strategic growth segments), mass-market desposit mobilization, credit portfolio growth and fee-based income. The respective weight of these, in terms of relative importance, will depend on the bank and its strategic objectives. It will also vary based in whether you are talking to an acquiring or an issuing bank. The best way to approach a bank is therefore to identify which core business element your startup is best positioned to support, and which bank is likelier to find the value prop attractive. I would suggest talking to the head of retail banking, the head of credit business and the head of acquiring business.AM
-
How to deal with co-founders that aren't pulling their weight?
I feel your pain — I've been there several times in a couple of my companies. Each situation ended up being unique, and had to be handled differently. I think there are a few things to consider before you make your decision: -- 1. What is in your cofounder's way? Is you cofounder being held up by a lack of clarity? Lack of motivation? Lack of autonomy? One of my past cofounders was very good at getting the job done, but didn't naturally have the skill to lay out tasks in a manageable way. To get around this, I worked with the whole team (4 people) to write up process documentation that removed the need to "figure out what to do next" that was tripping up this cofounder. -- 2. What job was your cofounder brought on to complete? And is it being completed? One of my companies brought on a cofounder simply to give us a marketing platform — he had a huge online audience — but he did nothing else. At first, this caused tension; once we had specifically laid out who was on the team and for what purpose, it was easier to identify where responsibilities lay. -- 3. Is your cofounder capable of doing the job? One of the more painful ordeals I've gone through in business is bringing on a good friend, then realizing that — despite his talent and intelligence — he just wasn't able to perform the job I'd hired him for. His skills were better suited for a different job: he needs hands-on management; he works better with repetitive tasks that don't require big-picture thinking; he lacks assertiveness and confidence, which were critical for the management-level role he'd been hired to do. After I tried to clear everything in his way, it became clear the company couldn't survive if he remained on the team. I had to lay him off. -- 4. Do you just simply not like the way this cofounder works? In one of my startups, there was a cofounder who I didn't know all that well, but he had amazing industry contacts and domain knowledge. However, once we started working together it became clear that we had VERY different working styles. He drove me completely nuts with (what seemed to me to be) a very ADHD-style of planning, with projects starting and being dropped and then coming out of nowhere with a call at 21:00 to discuss something critical that would be forgotten tomorrow. I'm sure I drove him nuts, too. So eventually we ended up selling that company — it was that or shutter it — because we knew there wasn't a chance we'd be successful if we continued as we were. -- Working with other people is tricky in general. Our instinct is to assume that we're the best workers on the planet and everyone else is incompetent, an idiot, a slacker, or all of the above. Usually it's a combination of an organizational-level lack of clarity, poor communication, no processes, and (sometimes) plain ol' we-don't-see-eye-to-eye-on-things-ness. Hopefully that helps. Feel free to get in touch if you'd like to hear specifics on my situations, or if you'd like any help devising a strategy for resolving your cofounder trouble. Good luck!JL
the startups.com platform
Copyright © 2025 Startups.com. All rights reserved.