dfnord

Thanks for the reply.

Yeah, I know. I meant more like personal, face to face connection. One conversation on a coffee shop is ok, but 5 emails back and forth, not really what I meant (not to dismiss the founders who sent 5 emails back and forth to me, you were really helpful, but this is not what I'd like to measure here).

Thanks for giving more of a entrepreneur perspective. I agree with you on that it is not a co-founder equity. However, I get the impression that VC would have a heart attack before even considering a better deal.

Considering the deal includes a trigger with very beneficial acceleration mechanism, I don't see them giving in more, on what already seams like an outstanding deal from the VC's perspective (the founders are relying on the VC's expertise on such deals, as they are not that familiar on what is standard and what is not).

Yes, I took that into consideration. The explicit equation, all from PG's article is:

i = 1 / (1 - n) + sp

where:

i: the amount I'll increase the company's worth divided by the profit multiplier (which is 1 + profit(%)/ 100, eg: 1.5 for a 50% profit)

n: equity received

sp: salary price. Which is anual salary * overhead (pg suggest 1.5) / company's valuation

In short, my values are:

n = 1%

i = 1.023 (2,3% which with a profit of 900% means they'd expect me to increase the company's value by 23%)

sp = a bit above market's salary (can't say much more, sorry)