121–126 of 126 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are services growing in popularity for this. (I don't have any affiliation, I've heard good things, and want to try it.) https://www.flystein.com
They charge USD 49 do give you a quote..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are services growing in popularity for this. (I don't have any affiliation, I've heard good things, and want to try it.) https://www.flystein.com
They charge USD 49 do give you a quote..
Hipmunk has been an excellent flight search tool, the best I have found as of a few years ago. Shockingly better than most of the rest of them back when it started, in terms of being able to understand and choose among numerous choices. Unfortunately, that was then and this is now. Several of the airlines have dropped out of participating in flight comparison sites, and those that do apparently pay staggeringly littl…
I never became a fan of Hipmuk but may check them out again. I use: 1. Expedia. Recently had a problem that they never issued me an eticket. Had to confirm with the airline directly that I actually have a ticket! 2. Vayama. Really like them. Good tool. Can be time consuming to change a ticket. 3.Book directly at airline. God idea, especially considering the problems laid out at #2. Not. Never book a ticket in a 3rd w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use Concur because my crappy corporate employer purchased it. My strong suspicion is anyone who matters makes his or her assistant use concur rather than doing it him/herself. The product is absolutely awful. Like just stunningly bad.
Most of their assistants just use AmEx travel (or some other travel agency software) -- which has a much higher per-seat license and actually ties in to the back-end reservation systems so you can see all flights, etc. As far as I can tell, Concur sources its data through site scraping in order to achieve the lower per-seat licensing costs (since flight data feeds are very expensive).
Hipmunk has been an excellent flight search tool, the best I have found as of a few years ago. Shockingly better than most of the rest of them back when it started, in terms of being able to understand and choose among numerous choices. Unfortunately, that was then and this is now. Several of the airlines have dropped out of participating in flight comparison sites, and those that do apparently pay staggeringly littl…
What is the best flight search these days?
My sincere condolences to all the option holding employees of Hipmunk who will not likely get back what they gave up in salary (due to liquidation preferences and the like, they will be lucky if they get anything, other than golden handcuffs.) 20 years and no equity has taught me that next time I do a start up, I want restricted stock, not options, with an exercise price of $0.01. Or founder stock. In fact, I think t…
Whats the difference between and RSU, founder shares and options to buy common shares? If there is liquidation preference on the preferred stock, you'll stick get nailed. Most raises only have the 1x liquidity preference as founders don't want to screw themselves as their shares sit in the common pool.
So, If an engineer gives up $70k a year in salary to work for a startup, the "options" should have an intrinsic value of $70k a year (the numbers that vest in that given year.) So should the RSUs. Anything less is cheating that engineer.
Those options or that stock should have the same participation as the venture capitalists. I will accept preferred having some narrow advantageous rights, but it should be only a few that are essential and make sense. Right now these deals are loaded down with double dipping that screws entrepreneurs because it is "standard practice "and "VCs need to cover their risk" -- but this is BS -- VCs have less risk. The VC is in many deals, the entrepreneur isn only one.
If anyone should get LPs it is engineers. So the company I'm founding next will have one class of stock, or if it has two it will be the founders and employees with preferred stock. (and sure VCs will balk, until they are desperate to get in on the deal-- but you should be raising money not when you have an idea or because you want to be able to pay yourself, but when your investors are desperate to get in on the deal. If that sounds unrealistic, then you're following the standard startup model, which is designed to screw founders, and now I'm getting circular so I'll get off this train.)
RSUs can be granted, with no cost, as a form of compensation. I think that's the better way to do it.
Options require an exercise price which is the source of a lot of hassle. For instance an early employee gets pushed out because someone wants his equity, so he has 90 days to come up with $35k/year (so $70k if he's been there 2 years) to exercise his options he's already effectively paid $70k a year (in lost salary) to get.
Options are very tenuous- they can be cancelled or adjusted in acquisitions (according to many terms) etc. RSUs have none of these problems. (Though the tax situation might be worse for them, but that's showing the IRS or the people who lobbied the IRS for the rules, setting it up to screw employees.)
I could go on.
Founder Shares are just shares with special rights for founders. Google and Facebook had them.