Startup founder salary

If it were not for the Founder, there would be no Start-up; after all, you are the EXPERT why should your time be free? In other words, why would you employ and pay someone who is only second-rate to do the job you would do?

The rational is a signalling effect, if don't believe so much in your startup, why should an external investor? I'm not sure there's a best approach, the Raman noodle funding only applies to (perpetually) broke uni grads plugging away at internet startup, not to family men with mortgages trying to tackle difficult engineering problems. A compromise might be to look at what a "professional" in equivalent paid position might be, then the difference goes into stock grants with a suitable risk multiplier. On the other hand, the more savings you pour back into your startup (of which depressed salary) then the lower the percentage is morally obligated to investors. Otherwise it would be a wealth transfer from the employees to stock-holders which can be manifestly unfair (depending on what gets chipped in). The other way to look at it is the cost of capital, if you had to hit the credit card until you reach break-even does the growth justify the compound interest (akin to opportunity costs), also what milestones is it worthwhile starting to trickle some cash to upgrade to instant pasta (negotiable with investors).

PS ... check out http://www.thefunded.com/ as it gives a lot more examples.
PPS I'm reminded of the joke that a VC once took a founder on cruise proudly pointing this mates' boat and that peer's catamaran and the guest asked pointedly where was the VC client's yachts.