Think about it from our perspective: part of the point of being a non-public company is that you can keep some things close to the vest, like profits and balance sheet. Perhaps 50% of the people we interview don't end up getting a position. What if you take that info and share it with competitors, or plaster it on TechCrunch?

This is particularly true if this was a follow up to a previous question (which is borderline) about how many months of cash were in the bank.

Should you judge the financial health of a company? Sure. Look them up on CrunchBase, observe the surroundings, do some research into market size yourself. But have some tact.

Now this is interesting. What triggers that reaction? Is it asking for the particular documents, or is it the request for meaningful information?

> Perhaps 50% of the people we interview don't end up getting a position. What if you take that info and share it with competitors, or plaster it on TechCrunch?

Good point, and looking at it from your perspective, sure, I'd be reluctant to open the kimono too. The main thing that stops me, since we're swapping data points, is that it would be the wrong thing to do. Betraying confidences is both unethical and often contrary to the protections of common law.

> This is particularly true if this was a follow up to a previous question (which is borderline) about how many months of cash were in the bank.

If you then smiled and cut me short, I'd be suspicious. It sounds like we both lost.

It's sort of like a woman who asks you what car you drive right off the bat, on the first date. It indicates she is only in it for the money. And that she also lacks the social intelligence necessary to gain information without revealing that she's only in it for the money.

For a startup to succeed its people need to be a bit irrational. A pure profit maximizing strategy for a good developer is just to do something boring at Google. You aren't joining a startup to do median case profit maximization, you're doing it to (a) do something interesting for a change and (b) have a shot at a big payday.

Now, there's a certain undercurrent here at HN that says "F you, pay me". OK, but this is not the type of personality that is likely to build something great. They are the first ones to bail when things get rough, the first ones to trash their former (or current) employers, the first ones to lay blame.

There is a role for highly skilled mercenaries, just as there is a role for really beautiful golddiggers. But they should gravitate to Google/really rich men, as that's where they'll find a mutually satisfactory exchange.

It's the same thing: I want a sense of the risk I'm taking, but without signalling (incorrectly IMO) that I'm just such a mercenary.

Sounds like basic due diligence when checking out a potential new employer to me.

I think your point #2 is valid even if you ask my initial question about "real money in the bank". If they don't know how much burn they have left or can't answer immediately or are reluctant, that is still a problem.

Small company: I think it's not unreasonable to know at least the headlines of the financial state. After all, small businesses are inherently riskier and I may be making financial commitments based on the presumption that I will have a job.

Big company: I can probably just look it up myself.

Medium company: That's where it gets tricky.

> I think your point #2 is valid even if you ask my initial question about "real money in the bank". If they don't know how much burn they have left or can't answer immediately or are reluctant, that is still a problem.

Or if they say "cashflow statement?"

I'd also want to know exactly how they make money or are planning to make money.

And the companies ability to pay that paycheck every Friday are of critical importance. We are all investors either with our money or our time (a paycheck is just a return on a time investment). I don't invest either without plenty of research.

I carry enough savings to get by for a few weeks if they go broke or tire of my lame puns; but for many people certainty is worth money. That's why lots of folks prefer steady paycheques to high hourly rates or equity.

1) Companies don't owe you any of this information as an interviewee. Sure, ask about the financial health of the company. But a balance sheet? Good luck.

2) You're going to get lied to in an interview about the health of the company. Do you really think a hiring manager is going to say "Yeah, we're throwing as many bodies as we can to finish this project, or else we're toast"? They want you to believe everything is fine from the day you start.

3) Even the financially secure companies hit the wall, get sued into oblivion, have their core product copied by Google, etc etc etc. You just don't know what will happen next.

They may not owe it to you just as you don't owe the company anything like showing up for an interview. It's what people do when they want a job and it's what the company should do if they want good people (this applies a lot more to small startup companies than a big corp because a big corp will have a lot of public information already out there). Good people will simply go somewhere else rather than take unneeded risks.

2) You're going to get lied to in an interview about the health of the company. Do you really think a hiring manager is going to say "Yeah, we're throwing as many bodies as we can to finish this project, or else we're toast"? They want you to believe everything is fine from the day you start.

Once again, if you lie to someone to get them to start work expect them to start looking to leave the day they find out you lied. They also will not likely work very well while they are still there. Of course, like #1, if the company is only hiring crappy people then it doesn't really matter. They are usually happy to take a job anywhere and ride the company into the ground.

3) Even the financially secure companies hit the wall, get sued into oblivion, have their core product copied by Google, etc etc etc. You just don't know what will happen next.

This is common sense. No one expects the company to know everything. That's all the more reason the company should be fairly open with potential employees so employees can walk in knowing what to expect. Let the employee decide before being hired if they want to be a part of a company that can easily be copyable or be a potential scam.

Wasn't it mentioned somewhere else in this thread that a lot of small VC-backed startups are contractually compelled to not disclose their finances?

And when a small startup says "okay, Mr Experienced Developer With High Salary Requirements, we can't afford you (because we're very tight on cash), but take this Awesome Restricted Stock in lieu of comp", what do you say? Isn't that the big risk that is supposed to lead to the Big Payday?

That's when you hammer them on what exactly they are doing. What is their product, market, sales strategy, exit strategy, pricing, and finances. Ownership, options, etc... are worthless in a worthless company. Risk doesn't mean going in blindly.

And yes, I've turned down options and jobs before because the CTO couldn't really answer these types of questions during an interview. Interestingly enough, the one company that was most secretive and offered me the most options was the one that went out of business a month after I turned them down. Others, I've heard after the fact how they are horrible places to work. The interview process is a two way street, especially in small companies.

If that's their situation, I won't complain.

> Isn't that the big risk that is supposed to lead to the Big Payday?

Sure, it's a bit of a gamble. But experienced punters check the form guide.