3 ms·
I think one of the points Adam repeatedly mentions in the article is that a contract in itself isn't really transparent. I get exactly what you are saying, it m
by jc4p 10y ago
I think one of the points Adam repeatedly mentions in the article is that a contract in itself isn't really transparent. I get exactly what you are saying, it makes logical sense from the perspective of someone who knows what's going on, but in all of these discussions my thoughts are on the young naive person signing up for a deal they don't fully understand.
I think stock options should be valued at zero. In an a-will employment state you, and with a typical contract, you can get fired at any random day and if you don't have enough money to exercise your vested options within 90 days, they're gone. I don't consider that reliable.
In regards to the parent comment of yours, I think if it was stated as "proactively answer" vs "answer" it'd be less arguable.
- argonaut 10y agoNone of that justifies valuing them at zero. Even if those reasons were valid, those reasons would maybe justify taking the official private valuation and cutting it by 75%.