If the VC ends up paying the CEO to eat Sushi while I eat Ramen, I don't care how I'm spoken to, there's a deal there I have to take or leave.
It's unwise for a VC (or anyone) to assume the person they are talking to is this objective.
Calling the founder "just a founder" is a recipe for resentment, and it's totally unnecessary. There are about a million ways to tell the founder that they can't get paid the same amount as the CEO, and this is pretty close to the most potentially damaging way I can think of.
Comments
If the VC ends up paying the CEO to eat Sushi while I eat Ramen, I don't care how I'm spoken to, there's a deal there I have to take or leave.
It's unwise for a VC (or anyone) to assume the person they are talking to is this objective.
Calling the founder "just a founder" is a recipe for resentment, and it's totally unnecessary. There are about a million ways to tell the founder that they can't get paid the same amount as the CEO, and this is pretty close to the most potentially damaging way I can think of.
> It's unwise for a VC (or anyone) to assume the person they are talking to is this objective.
I never said I was objective: It's really a question of which circumstance I dislike the least. :-)
Fair enough, I just thought you were talking past my main point...