3 ms·
Microsoft is pretty close too. Founded in 1975, issued stock in 1981 (5% to an investor, the rest to founders and employees), IPO in 1986 Source: http://www.te
by pacaro 9y ago
Microsoft is pretty close too. Founded in 1975, issued stock in 1981 (5% to an investor, the rest to founders and employees), IPO in 1986
Source: http://www.techntechie.com/early-investors-in-microsoft-you-would-love-to-know.html http://www.techntechie.com/early-investors-in-microsoft-you-...
- replicatorblog 9y agoThat's a great one! I tried to avoid companies that were more than a decade or so old, with a couple exceptions like Lynda/Epic. My concern was that examples like that, or Amazon which only raised $8M, are such crazy outliers and relied on strong timing, amazing founders, and other good fortune, that it made them hard to be approachable. That said—I'll make sure to give MS a headnod in the next revision!
- pacaro 9y agoIn a sense these are all crazy outliers, regardless of era. This is the essence of survivorship bias.
- elmar 9y agothey didn't even use the money, was a way to get a great advisor on the board.
- brudgers 9y agoMicrosoft is also interesting for the amount of wealth it created for regular employees via stock...10,000 millionaires in 1986 dollars. [1] I often wonder about how having so many millionaire employees shaped company culture in the late 80's and through the 90's. [1]: https://www.forbes.com/2010/06/28/microsoft-company-numbers-personal-finance-microsoft-shares.html https://www.forbes.com/2010/06/28/microsoft-company-numbers-...
- pacaro 9y agoI was only there 1999 to 2013, so I didn't directly experience it, although there were still plenty of "Microsoft Volunteers" when I started. A friend who was there through much of the 90s used to remark that it was great when the share price was exponential because "the assholes" would leave as soon as they could "call in rich", but the people who loved the job would stay. When the share price went flat, "the assholes" would start gaming the review system. There was definitely a change from an era in which salary was the smaller part of compensation to an era in which it became the dominant component, it took senior management too long to realize how important this change was