Do you have a product/service, viable enough to invest in growth? Are you ready to allocate budget to paid traffic that would drive you sales or leads?
If the answer is YES, Facebook advertising could be the ticket to profitable scaling of your business.
But are you up to speed on every little quirk in Facebook ads functionality and algorithms? Those could make all the difference between success and failure. Do you have the process for developing the advertising strategy and the right marketing experiments to get to insight and profitability quickly?
Help is available. Our process and software bring clarity to your marketing by aligning all strategies and tactics around the entire Customer Journey. We then help you and your team with technical marketing implementation (tags, pixels, CRM/email integrations, offline, apps, etc). And finally using that infrastructure and data to build and manage campaigns that cover the entire customer lifecycle.
Read more about our approach on the site/blog. Then take action.
Do you have a product/service, viable enough to invest in growth?
Are you ready to allocate budget to paid traffic that would drive you sales or leads?
If the answer is YES, Facebook advertising could be the ticket to profitable scaling of your business.
But are you up to speed on every little quirk in Facebook ads functionality and algorithms? Those could make all the difference between success and failure. Do you have the process for developing the advertising strategy and the right marketing experiments to get to insight and profitability quickly?
Help is available. Our process and software bring clarity to your marketing by aligning all strategies and tactics around the entire Customer Journey. We then help you and your team with technical marketing implementation (tags, pixels, CRM/email integrations, offline, apps, etc). And finally using that infrastructure and data to build and manage campaigns that cover the entire customer lifecycle.
Read more about our approach on the site/blog. Then take action.
Do you have a product/service, viable enough to invest in growth?
Are you ready to allocate budget to paid traffic that would drive you sales or leads?
If the answer is YES, Facebook advertising could be the ticket to profitable scaling of your business.
But are you up to speed on every little quirk in Facebook ads functionality and algorithms? Those could make all the difference between success and failure. Do you have the process for developing the advertising strategy and the right marketing experiments to get to insight and profitability quickly?
Help is available. Our process and software bring clarity to your marketing by aligning all strategies and tactics around the entire Customer Journey. We then help you and your team with technical marketing implementation (tags, pixels, CRM/email integrations, offline, apps, etc). And finally using that infrastructure and data to build and manage campaigns that cover the entire customer lifecycle.
Read more about our approach on the site/blog. Then take action.
You have free choice to avoid employment with companies that require non-competes.
Moreover you are even welcome to start a company that does not require non-competes and later on have the pleasure of investing in professional development of people who may later turn their talents against you.
Not if there are no (desirable/worthwhile) companies that take people on without a non-compete.
And what if you work for such a company but want to strike out on your own? The non-compete clause doesn't differentiate between an existing competitor and one you found yourself.
You also have the choice to bad mouth non-competes live in states where they are mostly invalid(like California) and support laws banning non-competes.
The most effective attack is the easiest to predict.
It is human intelligence or infiltration by actors with a hidden loyalty. This has worked since the time immemorial for all sorts of security systems.
For FBI to bring it down they'll just need to repeat what they've done with Silk Road - pose as a straw buyers, get everyone they touch on record and use them to identify/arrest the users. Put out a request for a contract killing and arrest all responders. Bonus for putting a bounty on members turning in other members.
Even if this won't "shut down" the system itself, it would make it impossible to use safely.
The only problem with such "justified" models is that it always comes down to what everyone thinks of everyone else's value to the company. For example -
1) A first employee might feel he should have been a founder
2) Two co-founders who might feel the 3rd one has not contributed enough to justify their share
3) Employee/contractor #20 (or whatever it is) at Facebook who painted graffiti on the walls ended up with a package worth $100M while it is hard for anyone to say with a straight face they actually created that much value (i.e. what is the reason for granting equity by job role)
4) Sizing of equity grants to engineers vs. sales staff, given that salesforce's primary motivation should be based on hitting their quotas with all incentives built around that
5) Someone fired a few months before the vesting cliff might think they are being cheated, while the company might believe they have been toxic to the culture (I won't name any examples here)
6) Employees "resting-and-vesting" at pretty much every level of the equity grant cohort
7) Later employees who end up carrying the weight of the earlier ones without comparable rewards
In every deal it all comes down to a willing buyer meeting a willing seller. Compensation packages are no exception.
I think you misunderstood the article. It's not about choosing how much to compensate someone. It's about how to allocate equity given a known compensation total.
It is an obviously foreseeable problem because the whole "startup echo chamber" keeps pressuring everyone to have co-founders for sake of having co-founders.
Better to be a single founder covering for everything than sign on "co-founders" you cannot get along with or do not see pulling their weight or having significant disagreements on how the company should be run and the rewards distributed.
pmarca only highlighted a practice that he thinks is unethical.
Lure a startup into accepting a term sheet at a crazy high valuation and get them into a no-shop clause. Once they break off with other investors, renegotiate the terms on the term sheets to a lower valuation. Since you're in a no-shop clause, you have no leverage over the VC and you have 2 options: Accept the lower valuation because there are no competition or reject the term sheet and start over. I bet lot of companies go with option A.
In the valley this is unacceptable and I am sure if someone would do that thing, companies wouldn't deal with that VC.
a16z sets price on the key deals but they don't renegotiate the terms later on as a tactic. This is the _key_ difference.
some of the SV VC have been taking such lead/guide role wrt. newly coming external money. A16Z seems to have decided to fight the wave instead of riding it.
There's a difference between sole investor in a specific financing round, and sole investor period. It's extremely rare that a16z is the only investor since they often don't participate in seed rounds and then try to do as much of the first equity financing round as possible.
From publicly available sources it's very clear that one of the two companies you listed has many more investors than a16z.
Are you driving leads & sales from Facebook Ads yet?
If not, you are missing out on the biggest traffic source there is
Not sure where to start? Help is here to get to results fast with a Blueprint
Our project process laid out here: https://targetchoice.com/W04
Schedule your Discovery Call to see if/how you could profitably scale your business
Blog : http://targetchoice.com/blog
Email : dk AT targetchoice.com