Originally Posted by antbar01

You guys are absolutely right, I can see how that sounded like I don’t want money to be a part of the equation. So let me clarify.

I have no problem with getting better compensation in a TA #2. But what I was trying to encourage in others is to not look at this from the perspective of “they aren’t paying me enough to give up scope protections,” but rather “lock up this language in a very limited way that gives us more power and oh, by the way, more money also.” The money doesn’t mean a thing without the words.

Most folks seem to get this, but if you wouldn’t vote for this TA now, but would vote for the exact same TA with 20% profit sharing, you’re looking at the problem wrong.

Thanks Payne for pointing out the mistake.