4 ms·

> That's not how it works. ...okay, uh, except for when what they explained is exactly how it works. Lots of people, at lots of companies, Google and Facebook

by wcarss 6y ago

> That's not how it works. ...okay, uh, except for when what they explained is exactly how it works. Lots of people, at lots of companies, Google and Facebook included, get meaningful add-on grants, often larger than their initial ones. These are frequently timed to the 4-5 year mark and especially handed out alongside promotions, for the exact reason that, otherwise, the employee will suddenly have a much lower annual payout and will be less 'aligned' with the with the company's future interest. I'm not claiming that what you said does not also happen, but what the others said certainly does too, and there's no reason to phrase this as some sort of definitive-exclusive thing.

joshuamorton 6y ago
> Lots of people, at lots of companies, Google and Facebook included, get meaningful add-on grants, often larger than their initial ones. This is I guess sort of true. They're certainly meaningful, it's unusual for them to reach the size of your initial grant quickly, and they'll usually trend upwards over time. > These are frequently timed to the 4-5 year mark and especially handed out alongside promotions This is empirically untrue. It may be true at some companies, but it is rare enough to be a blip at Google or Facebook ("Discretionary Equity" is the term, and its very rare). How these companies actually work is that there's a target stock grant at your level, let's say 50K. Your initial grant is larger (potentially much larger, depending on a number of factors, but usually 2-3x larger at a minimum). Higher performance increases the grant size, and promotion increases the target. So there's nothing particularly timed specially at the 4-5 year mark that increases the grant size. For reference, my stock grants (which are more or less typical) were ~130K at hire, 30K, promo 70K, 100K, 105K (I've reached the ceiling at my current level). My 130K at hire was above average for a new grad, but an experienced industry hire could get 200K+, and still experience the refresh grants I got.
dekhn 6y ago
My employer (Google) has been giving me add-on grants for as long as I've worked there (over 11 years). The number of pre-vest shares have increased over time (they give me larger add-ons). The biggest hit I took was leaving to work for a startup for a year and then returning, because that reset everything. I walked away from some absurd amount of pre-vested shares. I think my experience is fairly typical for senior/staff level employees with a long tenure, based on what I've heard from friends, coworkers, and HN comments.
- wcarss 6y ago
  Thanks; I appreciate a lot that you qualified what you said, and gave a justification for why your perspective is broadly true, rather than just assert a negative as a universal. I was mistaken. I didn't know that FAANGs (and likely similar) mostly do comp in this specific way that is different from other comp structures I've interacted with or known of, even despite interning at Google myself, and having friends work there and at others similar, whom I've discussed comp with at length. Somehow this point about stock grant structure has just never come up, and I've personally experienced the opposite, so I felt the strength of the assertion was unwarranted -- but anyway, I'm glad to learn it!
  - dekhn 6y ago
    The best way to think of it is, FAAMG are money guns and your job is to build bullet-proof buckets.

by wcarss 6y ago

joshuamorton 6y ago

> Lots of people, at lots of companies, Google and Facebook included, get meaningful add-on grants, often larger than their initial ones. This is I guess sort of true. They're certainly meaningful, it's unusual for them to reach the size of your initial grant quickly, and they'll usually trend upwards over time. > These are frequently timed to the 4-5 year mark and especially handed out alongside promotions This is empirically untrue. It may be true at some companies, but it is rare enough to be a blip at Google or Facebook ("Discretionary Equity" is the term, and its very rare). How these companies actually work is that there's a target stock grant at your level, let's say 50K. Your initial grant is larger (potentially much larger, depending on a number of factors, but usually 2-3x larger at a minimum). Higher performance increases the grant size, and promotion increases the target. So there's nothing particularly timed specially at the 4-5 year mark that increases the grant size. For reference, my stock grants (which are more or less typical) were ~130K at hire, 30K, promo 70K, 100K, 105K (I've reached the ceiling at my current level). My 130K at hire was above average for a new grad, but an experienced industry hire could get 200K+, and still experience the refresh grants I got.

dekhn 6y ago

My employer (Google) has been giving me add-on grants for as long as I've worked there (over 11 years). The number of pre-vest shares have increased over time (they give me larger add-ons). The biggest hit I took was leaving to work for a startup for a year and then returning, because that reset everything. I walked away from some absurd amount of pre-vested shares. I think my experience is fairly typical for senior/staff level employees with a long tenure, based on what I've heard from friends, coworkers, and HN comments.

wcarss 6y ago
Thanks; I appreciate a lot that you qualified what you said, and gave a justification for why your perspective is broadly true, rather than just assert a negative as a universal. I was mistaken. I didn't know that FAANGs (and likely similar) mostly do comp in this specific way that is different from other comp structures I've interacted with or known of, even despite interning at Google myself, and having friends work there and at others similar, whom I've discussed comp with at length. Somehow this point about stock grant structure has just never come up, and I've personally experienced the opposite, so I felt the strength of the assertion was unwarranted -- but anyway, I'm glad to learn it!
- dekhn 6y ago
  The best way to think of it is, FAAMG are money guns and your job is to build bullet-proof buckets.