Could this be a rational financial decision from an employee's point of view? I'm not smart about financial things, so perhaps someone can school me. As I unde

Could this be a rational financial decision from an employee's point of view? I'm not smart about financial things, so perhaps someone can school me. As I understand it, startups are usually acquired through stock swaps. So that $X million really means $X million in company stock. The investors cash out immediately, but employees vest years afterwards. So the employees are the only ones who care about the future value of the acquirer's stock. If Yelpers had calculated that 3 years hence, the difference between Yahoo and Google stock moves would have erased the difference in initial price, then does the Google deal become the rational choice? The difference wouldn't even have to be that large. If we assume a three year vesting period (with no partial vesting earlier on), and that growth rates are constant, then by my calculations the Google deal works out better for employees if (for example) Google grows by an average of 6% per year while Yahoo shrinks at 3.5% per year. But this is just my rambling, I don't actually know much about this stuff. Informed comment?