Yes, but... First of all, the stock the CEO is working for may become worthless due to irresponsible investor behavior. This has happened innumerable times; thus the CEO working for pennies is incurring huge albeit hidden risk. Secondly, the CEO may have a family to support, which argues for a reasonable income while putting in the inevitable 80+ hours per week, week after week, indefinitely. Thirdly, let's not forget that VCs are paying themselves salaries of millions per year plus a percentage of their 20% carry, so for them the game is a no-lose proposition. They're gambling with other people's money but raking in a boatload of cash at the same time. Arguing that the CEO should skirt penury while VCs enjoy risk-free million-dollar salaries is a rather dubious proposition. One last fun fact: I’ve seen, on several occasions, VCs step in to replace the founding CEO and appoint a new CEO. Who is then paid at least twice what the ousted leader was receiving, not to mention a boat-load of new restricted shares. Seems the money can be found when it’s needed…