no one start up is worth the initial fuck you money that allows you to spend the rest of your life working on cool startups rather than on someone elses boring stuff.
But they can have a chilling effect in attracting investment (been there, done that, in proto-companies where other key people had been foolish enough to sign them).
Part of the calculation is that if you turn out to be successful the threatening party will have every motivation to sue.
I'm certain the unenforceability of them in California has a lot to do with the sustained success of Silicon Valley (although in this case, as a founder, his might be enforceable there).
I see no schadenfreude in this article. On the contrary, I see this:
"For me, this was not sweet revenge but just the toughest decision (to sell or fight) that had turned out so positively!!"
I'm not sure why you ask the general question about winning. This is a story of a man making a choice that he thought would better his condition. He had no reason to do otherwise.
"... I'm not sure why you ask the general question about winning. ..."
From the VC point of view and the deal not going ahead unless Alok is totally removed is all about control and winning. I think the most positive lesson Alok demonstrated here is "... Sell when the going is good – not when the time is right. ..." ~ http://rodinhood.com/2010/06/05/confessions-of-a-digital-ent...
I think he brought out a very interesting perspective of how things unfold in the board room. Don't turn his post into what it's not - there was no "schadenfreude" in what he had written.
I understand that it must be frustrating to be forced out of your own company, but seriously -- you made a shitload of money. Be happy it worked out to your advantage, and go find something new to do.
