Board Members
> It’s a good idea to keep enough control so that investors can’t fire you (there are a lot of different ways to do this)Can anyone elaborate?Sam articulates several advantages to having a board (focus on execution, thinking big, hiring executives) but none of them really require the board to have voting control, i.e. the ability to override the founder.More generally, I think most founders would be fine with and welcome an outside board as long as there was a Zuckerberg-like voting agreement where the founders retained control. But then again I don't really understand the difference between that and a board of advisors.Bottom line, why do investors care about control at the early stages? Do they really expect that they'll need to override the founder in the nascent stages? Is it just a security blanket? I would be wary of investors who really insist on the ability to vote against the founders at the seed to series A stage.