3 ms·
How do they describe something that's working spectacularly well as, "broken". Sure, maybe it's not optimal or has some problems. But, broken? Really? But I do
by pbreit 11y ago
How do they describe something that's working spectacularly well as, "broken". Sure, maybe it's not optimal or has some problems. But, broken? Really?
But I do like what they're doing. Extending the option period makes perfect sense. I think they might have gone a bit far on the value sample. I think current % ownership + internal/external valuation should be sufficient.
- angersock 11y agoIs it really working "spectacularly well"? Or, is it just something that has kinda worked out because the workforce wasn't communicating how they were getting screwed to each other? I expect things to get more difficult for employers as employees wisen up.
- pbreit 11y agoWell, it's a key driver of Silicon Valley success over the past 50+ years.
- angersock 11y agoThe employee equity relationship today is, I would suggest, quite different than even 20 years ago. EDIT: I refer you to the "The three-class society" section of this essay: https://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2015/11/06/y-combinator-and-paul-graham-are-bad-for-the-world-part-1/ https://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2015/11/06/y-combinator...
- s73v3r 11y agoIs it? How so?
- pbreit 11y agoEquity compensation is probably the biggest difference between a startup and all other companies. Silicon Valley is probably the epicenter of startup success and that equity compensation has been a key driver of such success.
- s73v3r 11y agoYou're gonna need more to back up that statement. Especially given how much people get fucked over with options, and how many startups just fail.
- s73v3r 11y agoDefend "Working spectacularly well".
- pbreit 11y agoFirst, you would need to consider Silicon Valley startup activity to be successful (I do). Next, you would need to understand that equity compensation is almost the only difference between an SV startup and pretty much every other type of company (I do).
- conanbatt 11y agoThe second part is actually insane. Are you saying that if stock options were removed from Startups, then the entire tech sector would come crumbling down?
- pbreit 11y agoIf it impacted investor/founder equity, then, absolutely. If only founders, most probably. If only employees, probably.
- s73v3r 11y ago"Next, you would need to understand that equity compensation is almost the only difference between an SV startup and pretty much every other type of company (I do)." Except that is completely false. When I worked at Western Digital, which is decidedly NOT a startup, they still gave me plenty of stock. Amazon, which is also decidedly NOT a startup also gives out lots of stock. So your differentiator is not really a differentiator.
- optimusclimb 11y agoJust worked 3 years at a gig, from the "sharing a tiny office with another company" phase to significantly larger. Moved on, and had to let a lot of vested options go because it just didn't make financial sense at the time to buy them, given the risk factor. Were it not for the 90 days limit (which sure isn't in my favor), I'd have been able to hold on to what I earned, rather than see it evaporate. If anything, the system works spectacularly well for the founders, and investors. Not so much for the people they need to bring on to help their vision move forward.