I think it is still a serious red flag if you're offered a job at a startup but the equity terms haven't been settled yet. Sure, even if the terms are fixed, it is possible to get screwed down the road. And of course, employees are typically the last people to cash out if a liquidation event occurs. So what? A written agreement in a nascent company might not be worth a whole lot, but it's worth considerably more than a verbal one. If you aren't promised a specific equity stake in writing (in addition to information about the total # of outstanding shares etc.), then I'd assume you're not getting any equity -- you're probably not going to be too far off.
Furthermore, the fact that the equity hasn't been arranged is a sign that these entrepreneurs seem pretty clueless. I doubt that any reputable investor would sign on to invest in a company like that, for example. Not settling the equity up front doesn't "save time", as you've suggested elsewhere: sorting out the equity after the fact is likely to be more time-consuming and contentious than doing it earlier, when the company is smaller and consensus is easier to reach.
You're out of your fucking mind if you think this is the major risk of joining a startup.
If you want to see how the "owner" operates the company, ask questions about the sales pipeline. Ask for concrete answers about what happens when the "big customer" cuts them out of the budget.
If you don't know how the company's cash flows work, and you're reading tea leaves about the founders state of mind from meaningless equity numbers, then you're just wanking.
I'm simply stating that by not being clear and decisive from the get-go, you can only expect more of same later on, possibly when it's more painful.
I didn't say anything about a 'major risk', just that it's a hint about how the guy operates. Could be he's wishy washy, or that he's playing games, it's not possible to know.
Furthermore, the fact that the equity hasn't been arranged is a sign that these entrepreneurs seem pretty clueless. I doubt that any reputable investor would sign on to invest in a company like that, for example. Not settling the equity up front doesn't "save time", as you've suggested elsewhere: sorting out the equity after the fact is likely to be more time-consuming and contentious than doing it earlier, when the company is smaller and consensus is easier to reach.