The Lack of Options for Startup Employees’ Options
1–10 of 125 posts
Re: The Lack of Options for Startup Employees’ Options
#2This is a really good read. It pisses me off to no end, but anybody who is an engineer (especially an early engineer, christ!) should read this to try and understand the mindset of investors and new founders.
This article articulates what seems to be a common sentiment among founders I've met: early employees who want to do good work and cash out are a liability.
The rhetoric proposed here of "early employees who leave" vs "god-fearing quality employees who stay or join" is targeted directly at dividing and taking advantage of us.
EDIT: If you would like to downvote me, please do explain your reasoning.
Re: The Lack of Options for Startup Employees’ Options
#3This is a really good read. It pisses me off to no end, but anybody who is an engineer (especially an early engineer, christ!) should read this to try and understand the mindset of investors and new founders. This article articulates what seems to be a common sentiment among founders I've met: early employees who want to do good work and cash out are a liability. The rhetoric proposed here of "early employees who lea…
[deleted]
Re: The Lack of Options for Startup Employees’ Options
#4This is a really good read. It pisses me off to no end, but anybody who is an engineer (especially an early engineer, christ!) should read this to try and understand the mindset of investors and new founders. This article articulates what seems to be a common sentiment among founders I've met: early employees who want to do good work and cash out are a liability. The rhetoric proposed here of "early employees who lea…
When I left my last company I had to write a check for about $10K to buy my options. It's like rolling the dice.
Re: The Lack of Options for Startup Employees’ Options
#5This is a really good read. It pisses me off to no end, but anybody who is an engineer (especially an early engineer, christ!) should read this to try and understand the mindset of investors and new founders. This article articulates what seems to be a common sentiment among founders I've met: early employees who want to do good work and cash out are a liability. The rhetoric proposed here of "early employees who lea…
I really don't understand why employers don't allow the employees to exercise the options right in the beginning when the value is much much lower.
Re: The Lack of Options for Startup Employees’ Options
#6This is a really good read. It pisses me off to no end, but anybody who is an engineer (especially an early engineer, christ!) should read this to try and understand the mindset of investors and new founders. This article articulates what seems to be a common sentiment among founders I've met: early employees who want to do good work and cash out are a liability. The rhetoric proposed here of "early employees who lea…
I really don't understand why employers don't allow the employees to exercise the options right in the beginning when the value is much much lower.
Usually you are allowed to exercise the options as soon as they are vested.
Re: The Lack of Options for Startup Employees’ Options
#7This is a really good read. It pisses me off to no end, but anybody who is an engineer (especially an early engineer, christ!) should read this to try and understand the mindset of investors and new founders. This article articulates what seems to be a common sentiment among founders I've met: early employees who want to do good work and cash out are a liability. The rhetoric proposed here of "early employees who lea…
I really don't understand why employers don't allow the employees to exercise the options right in the beginning when the value is much much lower.
I really don't understand why good employees work in startups instead of going to an IPO-ed company. Most of the time in the current climate they are worse off.
Re: The Lack of Options for Startup Employees’ Options
#8This is a really good read. It pisses me off to no end, but anybody who is an engineer (especially an early engineer, christ!) should read this to try and understand the mindset of investors and new founders. This article articulates what seems to be a common sentiment among founders I've met: early employees who want to do good work and cash out are a liability. The rhetoric proposed here of "early employees who lea…
I really don't understand why employers don't allow the employees to exercise the options right in the beginning when the value is much much lower.
Many companies allow you to exercise your options and file an 83b election with the IRS. This only really works well though for the earliest employees because valuations often go up so fast that the exercise prices becomes prohibitive a year or two in. Then later, if your price is low and the stock price is high, exercising becomes cost prohibitive on the tax side where you pay taxes on the difference (AMT) even though you can't sell the stock. It is complicated issue but at its core is the IRS IMHO.
Re: The Lack of Options for Startup Employees’ Options
#9Would issuing RSUs instead of options avoid this issue?
Re: The Lack of Options for Startup Employees’ Options
#10This is a really good read. It pisses me off to no end, but anybody who is an engineer (especially an early engineer, christ!) should read this to try and understand the mindset of investors and new founders. This article articulates what seems to be a common sentiment among founders I've met: early employees who want to do good work and cash out are a liability. The rhetoric proposed here of "early employees who lea…
The Donald Trump-esque "dear employee, getting to keep the options you've 'earned' is, like, actually bad for you! No really!" is amazing. And referring to vested yet unexercised options as dead money really demonstrates what a rip-off options are as a comp method.
Frankly, I don't think fairness has anything to do with anything. My bet is more that valley employees talk, and more of us know someone who's gotten screwed on options. Or are ourselves in that boat. (Raises hand! Dear former employer, please eventually go public. Pretty please? I'd really like my $15k back eventually.) Add in increasing times to ipo and frothy valuations and going to goog/apple/fb/amazon/LI/et al and getting RSUs which are essentially cash is way more attractive than options. So you see Sam Altman (to his credit, but also to his financial health) pushing 10 year vesting periods and an ISO NSO flip because YC needs engineers for all those startups, and if experienced engineers strongly prefer public companies, that's a big problem.
And the author admits his goals:
with the provision that a departing employee cannot exercise his or her
stock options unless there has been a liquidity event? If you stay, you’re a
serious owner, but if you don’t want to be part of the company for any
reason you won’t be an owner.
But hey, good luck selling the idea that if you should leave any time in the 10-ish years before ipo, you get fuck and all from "your" options. But you should choose options over google stock! No really! Why aren't you jumping at this chance? Come back!
Edit: a friend just got $290 combined cash + rsus from a post-ipo company in sf. The total comp numbers eg patio11 talks about are real. You have to be a sucker to turn down that type of cash for options that disappear if you leave anytime before ipo.