I'm the technical co-founder of my own startup (
http://carmivore.com) and I can't say I agree with this one. See, developers are easy to find (yes, probably not the best ones, but since I'm a developer myself I know a good one when I see their code), and to get an MVP going, you don't really need a highly qualified expert, just someone that can build a relatively simple and stable app (or whatever), hell, even in PHP.
And usually, first employees just don't share the passion for a startup in the same amount founders do, which means there's probably less self-initiative and less contributive to the product itself.
So why should I offer equity to someone who I can easily replace (yes, everyone is replacable, but since it's my company I call the shots :)? At the end of the day, their job will only be transforming my thoughts into code.
EDIT: On the other hand I agree that if I'm not sharing equity, the first employee should get proper salary.
And usually, first employees just don't share the passion for a startup in the same amount founders do, which means there's probably less self-initiative and less contributive to the product itself.
So why should I offer equity to someone who I can easily replace (yes, everyone is replacable, but since it's my company I call the shots :)? At the end of the day, their job will only be transforming my thoughts into code.
EDIT: On the other hand I agree that if I'm not sharing equity, the first employee should get proper salary.