A few things make the data slightly misleading. In cases of multiple founders (so most of the data points), only one founder seems to be represented by the "Founder Ownership" percentage. Additionally, in some cases the percentages are representative of voting rights not actual monetary value of said "ownership".
This causes some founder/ceo/early teams to appear over represented: Sergey Brin, Larry Page & Zuck, while others appear under represented.
I can't help but feel that these flaws make the final assessments tilted toward the point of the article which appears to be something along the line of `owning 11% at IPO is totally normal, don't sweat it`. This is VC content marketing through and through. Additional note: "That means smaller investors and employees owned 27% of these businesses at IPO." The idea that employee pools make up a sizable chunk of most of these companies is completely laughable.
This causes some founder/ceo/early teams to appear over represented: Sergey Brin, Larry Page & Zuck, while others appear under represented.
I can't help but feel that these flaws make the final assessments tilted toward the point of the article which appears to be something along the line of `owning 11% at IPO is totally normal, don't sweat it`. This is VC content marketing through and through. Additional note: "That means smaller investors and employees owned 27% of these businesses at IPO." The idea that employee pools make up a sizable chunk of most of these companies is completely laughable.