Given the criteria I set above - I would love to know your experience with it before you call it baloney.
If you’ve never been a critical employee in building a company from zero to something, I think that says enough.
Failing that experience and focusing on what the company is doing for you is the brightest light ever telling you that you’ll never be part of a successful startup.
So much of this is commentary by people who have never worked at a successful startup that grows from zero to 100M+. Purists who would do well with a union and have never felt what it is to be part of a core team that brings something from zero to changing the world. They focus on questions like what has the company done for me? And ignore the basic tenets of employment. Go work for a 10,000+ company with that attitude.
1) Decide if this company is in this category (you’re proud to be part of it and think it can change the world);
2) Decide if you are someone who is capable of doing this (it’s a huge commitment, are your ready and able to be a world changer?);
3) Determine if you’re in an early enough group to justify this commitment (~first ten? 20?); and,
4) Set reasonable parameters around checking in / email to be available in an emergency, but otherwise are on holiday (i.e. if it’s not an emergency / meeting agreed upon emergency requirements, you’re on holiday and not working)
— you’re not just answering questions via email).
Above all, say what you mean (I will / will not do this) and do what you say.
For context, I’m founder of three startups collectively >$500M exits. And any first five-ten employees who didn’t understand the above would have a short tenure. They’re simply not startup material.
That said, we strive for 40-hour weeks, we take evenings and weekends off, and we expect all statutory holidays and personal holidays off — always with the caveat that if the fit hits the shan, we’re all available to band together and solve the problem.
I have been a founder of three companies that led to successful (>$100M) acquisition over the last 20 years. Always in tech / CTO role.
Reading your post and comments, it seems to me that your ego and reality are somewhat disconnected. Not to say that you aren’t good at what you do, but you have no idea what it takes to actually build a company. It doesn’t matter how good the tech is, you don’t have a company without all the other parts.
I would also like to call out your suggestion that equity balance can solve the problem. This really makes me question the sophistication of your thinking, and casts serious doubt on your abilities as a leader and team builder - a key skill for a successful CTO.
From what I’ve read here, my assessment of you is a low (leadership) potential, very high-performance employee. Not CTO material without a lot of growth quickly.
The fault I would see in the CEO is if he doesn’t recognize his mistake soon enough and fire you before your stock vests. I see no way for the company to be successful with you as CTO and the huge schism in the leadership team that already exists.
My earliest days had the most fantastic tricks. So called game engines were useless. Now it’s the complete opposite.