3 ms·
Well if you vest, then you do "get it". But you vest options, which is not shares. You "get" the option to buy shares in the company at $X strike price. The co
by hkmurakami 10y ago
Well if you vest, then you do "get it". But you vest options, which is not shares. You "get" the option to buy shares in the company at $X strike price.
The confusion seems to lie more in ISOs vs RSUs (or just plain equity, which is what most people have exposure to via the public market), rather than what "vesting" means. The problem is that vesting to most will inaccurately imply "getting" something they are not.
- teej 10y agoA major difference between a 3 month window and a 10 month window is that with the former, you "get" to purchase lottery tickets. With the latter you have massively reduced downside risk.
- abalone 10y agoYou are arguing technical details when the issue is one of exploiting laypeoples' misunderstanding of technical details. It's not about confusing options for shares. It's confusion about how the 90 day window works. It is not at all obvious that the tax consequences may be many times greater than the strike price, resulting in you losing your vested options. This has been a surprise for many otherwise smart people. If you replaced it with more transparent terms, such as a "cliff that goes all the way to the IPO" or a heavily backloaded vesting schedule, I'd say most would consider it a below-market offer, even though it's roughly comparable. That's a reflection of the opacity and poor understanding of the standard terms.