How would they possibly know the terms of either offer as former employees?
Um, chances are the know people who work there
Former Zoox employees sue, alleging rival offer was better than Amazon's
31–40 of 180 posts
Re: Former Zoox employees sue, alleging rival offer was better than Amazon's
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wish YC with all of its power and influence could try to change things for the better here. Early employees' blood, sweat, and tears, not to mention burning the midnight oil, often go into actualizing the founders' vision. Often these key early hires are alongside the founders working equally hard since day 10 or even day 1. I remember Sam Altman posting lamenting that the most talented engineers are more intereste…
There are so many VCs now, and all of them are looking for an edge. There is an obvious edge in building a term-sheet that creates a full ratchet for the employee stock option plan at 10%, where each employee earns points toward the total based on days worked, and 10-year exercise windows. Then that VC needs to lead rounds and talk constantly about how the employees and companies they fund have the best chance of an…
I'm just not sure how someone who is not already able to command lead investor-ship through their reputation and added value would be able to sell such a "short deal" to founders. YC can. Maybe they could demonstrate much more effective recruiting.
Re: Former Zoox employees sue, alleging rival offer was better than Amazon's
#33Would it matter? When presented options, they aren't required to choose the best on a given metric. They can choose any, as long as the votes align. Perhaps the founders believed their product would go further (not die) under Amazon or that they stood to benefit more from stock rewards long term
I think this is a misunderstanding between "shareholders" and "board members". Shareholders can indeed vote however they want. Board members are fiduciaries, and vote on behalf of all shareholders. That a board member is also a shareholder (say, the founder) doesn't remove her duties to all shareholders. While fiduciary duties are somewhat broad & fuzzy most of the time, they narrow during a sale of a company to basi…
[deleted]
Re: Former Zoox employees sue, alleging rival offer was better than Amazon's
#34Would it matter? When presented options, they aren't required to choose the best on a given metric. They can choose any, as long as the votes align. Perhaps the founders believed their product would go further (not die) under Amazon or that they stood to benefit more from stock rewards long term
I think this is a misunderstanding between "shareholders" and "board members". Shareholders can indeed vote however they want. Board members are fiduciaries, and vote on behalf of all shareholders. That a board member is also a shareholder (say, the founder) doesn't remove her duties to all shareholders. While fiduciary duties are somewhat broad & fuzzy most of the time, they narrow during a sale of a company to basi…
Seems like HN is doing something that’s breaking the direct linking to that Wikipedia page. Have to click through to the suggested page to get to the true article
Re: Former Zoox employees sue, alleging rival offer was better than Amazon's
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are so many VCs now, and all of them are looking for an edge. There is an obvious edge in building a term-sheet that creates a full ratchet for the employee stock option plan at 10%, where each employee earns points toward the total based on days worked, and 10-year exercise windows. Then that VC needs to lead rounds and talk constantly about how the employees and companies they fund have the best chance of an…
I'm just not sure how someone who is not already able to command lead investor-ship through their reputation and added value would be able to sell such a "short deal" to founders. YC can. Maybe they could demonstrate much more effective recruiting.
If you picture a cap table having 3 components
1) Investor's Share 2) Founder's Share 3) Employee's Share
Founders try to optimize for their own share, but investors basically destroy the employee share to get founders to agree. I don't believe most founders are sophisticated enough to model employee interests until it is too late.
My belief is that a new structure could be sold to founders by being a thought leader. In a world with tons of money and no edge, I believe its worth it for someone to try.
But... I'm not a VC, and personally believe its the most difficult gig in investing (which investing is the most difficult gig in any job long-term). So, take anything I say with a massive grain of salt.
Re: Former Zoox employees sue, alleging rival offer was better than Amazon's
#36One important factor in deciding which buyer for a startup, especially for the founders, is which company will most likely carry out the vision and mission of the original startup.
For example, if the higher rival offer was from Yahoo/Verizon, then Amazon almost assuredly the right choice.
This sucks for those employees though.
Re: Former Zoox employees sue, alleging rival offer was better than Amazon's
#37For all the ire on this site about the likes of Google, Apple, etc. screwing over the small company with their 30% app store fee, why isn't there even more outrage over the founders and startups who screw over their even more deserving-of-help employees?
You know, the employees who get subjected to unregulated dilution, tyrannical bosses, unreasonable hours and unclear compensation for trading off the prime years of their life? The ones who sign papers that look like an official company that has rules and structures, only to find that it's really "whatever the CEO wants to do"?
You would think people would be up in arms about that.
Re: Former Zoox employees sue, alleging rival offer was better than Amazon's
#38One important factor in deciding which buyer for a startup, especially for the founders, is which company will most likely carry out the vision and mission of the original startup. For example, if the higher rival offer was from Yahoo/Verizon, then Amazon almost assuredly the right choice. This sucks for those employees though.
That would be fine if only the founders were shareholders but there are also other shareholders.
Re: Former Zoox employees sue, alleging rival offer was better than Amazon's
#39For all the ire on this site about the likes of Google, Apple, etc. screwing over the small company with their 30% app store fee, why isn't there even more outrage over the founders and startups who screw over their even more deserving-of-help employees? You know, the employees who get subjected to unregulated dilution, tyrannical bosses, unreasonable hours and unclear compensation for trading off the prime years of…
I think it’s sufficiently esoteric so that there’s not enough people to be up in arms.
Re: Former Zoox employees sue, alleging rival offer was better than Amazon's
#40For all the ire on this site about the likes of Google, Apple, etc. screwing over the small company with their 30% app store fee, why isn't there even more outrage over the founders and startups who screw over their even more deserving-of-help employees? You know, the employees who get subjected to unregulated dilution, tyrannical bosses, unreasonable hours and unclear compensation for trading off the prime years of…
Because Startups don't have a virtual monopoly on jobs the issue is much less pressing than with app stores. Of course that doesn't mean that programmers shouldn't form a union.