Every crypto offer letter has a line for the token allocation. Most candidates read the number of tokens. Almost nobody asks the four questions that decide what that line is actually worth.

Three. Is there a token yet. Pre launch, the grant is a promise plus a launch date that will move. Four. What happens when you leave. Vested but unclaimed tokens under a good leaver clause, a bad leaver clause, or nothing in the contract at all.

A candidate resigns. Twenty minutes later the counteroffer shows up. More cash, a title bump, a promise about the roadmap. It works less often than hiring managers think, and it should not decide anything either way.

People rarely quit over the number on a payslip. It is usually scope, a manager, or watching a smaller team ship faster. A raise does not touch any of that. The same reasons are still there six months later, just better paid.

Specs still ask for 7 years of production DeFi experience. Uniswap launched in November 2018. Most of the talent pool learned the job in the 2020 cycle. A years filter that tight does not find a senior engineer. It removes the four year person who shipped through two drawdowns.

Every crypto firm that raises a Series B eventually announces the same thing. Return to office, three days a week, sometimes five. It reads as maturity. It is actually the fastest way to lose the people who built the thing.

RTO makes sense when the job is coordination heavy and junior. It works against you when the job is scarce and senior. On our security and infra searches this year, an RTO clause has cost more strong finalists than comp ever has.

One recruiter quotes 15 percent. Another quotes 25. Most hiring managers pick the 15 and call it a saving. Here is the maths they skip.

Now the other side. An empty seat costs from day one. An engineer not shipping for a quarter. A wrong hire, six months lost, back to square one. On a senior crypto role, a month of delay usually costs more than the ten points between the quotes.