stevievee

So this is the level of finance/accounting sophistication now expected for a business with a valuation of $30m–60m? Maybe I'm out of touch. I think this guide lowers the bar unnecessarily.

It's really not. The overall tone is "You don't know anything about finance/accounting as an inexperienced leader but that's okay! - Just outsource it! Oh and here are some tidbits so you can pass off as knowledgeable in conversation"

Marco Arment has been one of my favorite makers to follow over the years. Awesome.

Too much to address so I generalized.

I don't have time to go into details but the very big problems you could encounter mainly revolve around misses on compliance because you took a very lax approach to Finance ie. accounting standards, tax rules, payroll records, stock options and more. Just as a very simple example - I've seen a $1 million MRR company get eviscerated for not paying attention to something as basic as sales tax rules.

This is just a bad piece of content marketing.

If you just raised a $30-60+ million Series A and are relying on anything in this article, you will have bigger problems. It is this self-righteous approach to finance/accounting that gets companies into trouble down the line.

A UI for accessing my ebook library on my ios/mac devices. A custom fork of Calibre-Web

You can buy a shoebox in the sky or something tattered in the middle of nowhere. This is by design of course. All hail the central planners

This article and many like it "assign fault" to the labour by making too many assumptions about the cause of the decrease in labour productivity being a decrease in labour effort, motivation etc. In reality, this just a misrepresentation of the metric. Not sure why you don't think this would anger some people.

Well put. I am the same way.

I view it as the vector of my past experiences and knowledge. Though, I do have to be careful not to conflate gut with excess of any emotion ex. greed, hope etc. I am also carefully aware of when the "rules of the game" might be changing but that might be the "data" you are describing.

Agree completely. I like the point on disagreement of value and OP should be prepared to move on.

I just want to add that OP should negotiate for the future and not get too hung up on trying to recover the past or think they are entitled to any equity appreciation they missed out on. Sticking too much to principle might just leave resentment lingering. While it is possible to negotiate to make up for the past I think there is more value in focusing on the future.

ie. Even if OP negotiated harder now, the equity is unlikely to be gifted to make up for the past. It may come in the form of vesting options but that will likely be structured to only gain value from the time of grant (now) onwards. That... or OP will get lower % equity than would have been received in the past. Knowing this, I think it is still better to correct it going forwards than worry about any missed appreciation.

"...the retail giant has pledged to become the Earth's Best Employer, not just for frontline warehouse workers but for corporate and technical employees, too..."*

* As long as it doesn't interfere with the share price and exec bonuses

Who says it will only be Edwin?

[Insert name] from Stripe here... [Insert apology] [Insert vague explanation] [Insert promise to investigate and resolve]

I love how you worded your advice here and I agree this is the best approach because macroeconomics is a "social science".

Everything you hear and understand about central banking as it exists today is just part of the prevailing school of economic thought. It is not the only way forward and many would argue it is not even the best way forward (but we are always led to believe it is)

If only these studios appreciated that they could compound the value of the IP by rallying the existing fans (ie. "early adopters") instead of trying to jump straight to the "majority" audience. It is just corporate greed mixed with hubris. The Foundation tv show is another example of this short-sighted approach.