3 ms·
She mentions this in the article - most deals are structured with carve-outs so that specifically those employees you want to stay get multi-million payouts (ov
by nostrademons 7y ago
She mentions this in the article - most deals are structured with carve-outs so that specifically those employees you want to stay get multi-million payouts (over multiple years) as long as they stay with the employer. If there was no such carve-out for the VP, it means the acquirer doesn't want them.
The answer is still "walk", but the acquirer is not going to care. The reason to walk is that there's no sense staying in a job where your employer doesn't want you and isn't going to reward you. It's for your own self-respect, not to stick it to the man.
- CalChris 7y agoI'm going to plead guilty to giving up after I saw the preference overhang thrust of the article. She in fact gives a good outline of the issues involved. Maybe I had Travis Kalanick and Adam Neumann in the back of my mind. Still the element of unfairness about is that Certain key employees were incentivized with a “ carve-out “ in order to stay through the transaction and make sure it would happen. Using the example, four years is a long time to be rewarded with squat. However, Roizen also points out that common stock is priced lower than preferred. Usually someone like an engineering VP or a senior contributor will figure things out well before that and bail. The idea that this was somehow a surprise is difficult to accept. Yes, it is definitely for your own self respect.