:-/ Insults aren't appreciated when I'm posting a question about how to make sure we're offering value to people. Unless this became digg when I wasn't looking, and insults are cool as long as they're funny?
Ironic, because the very low bar for qualified applicants to be your "lead developer" screams that you're looking for a code monkey to take advantage of, which most people on here probably find insulting.
I agree with the concept that you can not get an intelligent engineer to work for equity only with out become a founding member. However, I disagree with the notion that it is simply because of the lack of a fancy title. It is because of the level of sacrifice one has to make. Ones livelihood becomes intrinsically tied to the success of the company. Additionally the work load would be somewhat equivalent to the other founding members. Any reasonable person then would conclude that they should reap the same rewards as the other members.
However, I disagree with the notion that it is simply because of the lack of a fancy title.
It's nothing to do with the title. It's to do with the level of equity involved. Someone with 2% equity is a sucker. Someone with 30% equity (in a 3-people start-up) is a founder.
If you're looking to hire someone who has the ability to pull a whole start-up out of their ass (through their competence and extremely hard work), then it means they could just as well work on their own start-up (where they'd have 100% equity). So why should they join you, unless you're offering a significant portion of ownership and you add value to that start-up equivalent to your share ownership?
