Joel Spolsky, co-founder and CEO of our portfolio company Stack Exchange, posted an excellent answer to the question in the title of this post on the Stack site OnStartups.
I'm not going to reblog the entire answer here. I'd encourage you to go read Joel's answer. However, I am going to highlight some of the most important points from Joel's post:
The thing I love the most about Joel's post is he throws darts into a lot of conventional wisdom about founder equity allocation. I particularly like his notion that the person with the idea should not command a premium on equity allocation.
What Joel's post makes clear is that founder equity should be for services to be rendered in the tough initial year(s) when the risk is highest and capital (ie cash comp) is nonexistent. It is not for coming up with the idea, writing a patent, or going without a salary.
And I second with emphasis the focus on fairness. Founding teams that allocate the founders equity fairly stay together a lot more than founding teams where one founder has a much better deal than the others. The same is true of venture capital firms. The most stable venture partnerships are those where the partners share in the carry equally or near equally. At the end of the day, this is as much about respect as it is about money. And when people feel disrespected, they are going to leave at some point.
Great post by Joel. I'm looking forward to the disqussion on this one.