4 ms·

I have never had a stock option that was worth anything. As a result, I count their value as zero if they’re part of an employment offer, although it’s been a w

by dhosek 5y ago

I have never had a stock option that was worth anything. As a result, I count their value as zero if they’re part of an employment offer, although it’s been a while since I’ve had them as a putative benefit as well.

marssaxman 5y ago
Sensible. I do likewise.
- drunkenmagician 5y ago
  Second that as well. Options are a 'nice, but show me the cash' deal for me too.
  - iancmceachern 5y ago
    Third, me too.
TameAntelope 5y ago
Counterpoint; I would give serious pause to hiring someone who didn't think the stock options would ever be worth anything. You have the power to effect that outcome, and giving up that power makes me a decent amount less likely to enjoy working with you.
- winrid 5y ago
  I worked my butt off for almost a decade under this mentality, built products that make almost 100m a year. I won't see a return probably for another 5-10 years. It's a scam, don't let people like this fool you. You can have a positive impact, yes, but put what you have control over first. Your happiness and compensation that you get twice a month.
  - 2143 5y ago
    > compensation that you get twice a month. I dug into this and was surprised to learn that salaries are paid every fortnight in USA. I wonder why. Does anybody know if this is the case even in FAANG companies? Where I'm from it's paid monthly. I think I prefer that.
    - willcipriano 5y ago
      Why do you prefer to wait longer to be paid?
      - LeonidasXIV 5y ago
        Because other payments are monthly (rent, ISP, mobile phone contract, subscriptions - at least in Europe), so having a constant money in <-> money out equilibrium makes sense. Unless these things are also charged every 2 weeks in the US.
        checker 5y ago
        Plenty of US places pay twice a month, so you get the monthly budget consistency and get your money sooner.
        beeboop 5y ago
        I think the idea in the US is that if you're having to wait an extra two weeks to get paid, you're essentially having to "float" half your monthly income all the time. This impacts people who are on the poorer end of the scale, and there's a very high percentage of Americans that don't have more than a few hundred dollars to their name.
      - 2143 5y ago
        I think it's more of a psychological thing for me. If I were to get my income every day, that would be very boring. On the other hand if I were to get my income once in 6 months, that would be horrifying. But 1 month seems to be a sweet spot. Double the amount half as often. Other utility bills come in monthly in my country (which is in Asia by the way), so that's a factor as well. But yeah, I can now kind of see the appeal of getting paid every 2 weeks.
- croon 5y ago
  It depends. Future value is a risk, and the reward is usually granted to founders. If the stock options are offered as compensation assuming a value that amounts to a competing salary, that means you are taking on founder risk, but without founder award. Thus, either stock option compensation must be much larger than salary, or it should, as GP suggests, be counted as a potential bonus and nothing more.
- thinkharderdev 5y ago
  The problem is that the relationship between your outcome as a holder of ISOs and the outcome for the company as a whole is pretty opaque. You have no idea what the companies cap table looks like, what sort of liquidity preference the VCs have and what are the various ways in which you can be diluted. If you want to offer people ISOs as a bonus/inventive (i.e. pay a market salary and throw in options as an extra) then great. But if you are asking people to trade off salary for a financial instrument that can't possibly be valued with the information available to then it is kind of shitty to be upset when someone gives them an implicit value of 0.
  - TameAntelope 5y ago
    What do you mean, "You have no idea what the company's cap table looks like"? Ask! I mean yeah, if you don't know those things sure, it becomes a lot harder to understand, but I've been given that information when I've asked so far, and I would pass that information along now as well.
- allisdust 5y ago
  Then you honestly don't understand how screwed up common stock with its multiple clauses is. Not only can employees not significantly change the liquidation outcome of a company below certain level (leadership etc), but even if they could/will and the company ends up with a great liquidation event, the rewards to employees won't be proportional. Which makes the OP's worth zero comment a good way to compare between offers (at the least, assume only a percentage of the potential profits).
muzani 5y ago
I tried to negotiate stock options as part of a compensation with an employer. They seriously considered it and almost gave in. After actually doing the research I realized, they would be worth nearly zero (there was some dodgy stuff on the financial records too). Then I decided to quit because it would be a waste of time and effort working there. Anyway, the moral I took from that was to seriously reconsider working at a place where the stock options are worth nothing. Probably consider consulting for them or something else more cash heavy.
Cthulhu_ 5y ago
I mean I'd take stock options, but only as a bonus, not as a replacement or fill-in for a wage. I've got bills and a mortgage, after all.

by dhosek 5y ago

marssaxman 5y ago

Sensible. I do likewise.

drunkenmagician 5y ago
Second that as well. Options are a 'nice, but show me the cash' deal for me too.
- iancmceachern 5y ago
  Third, me too.

TameAntelope 5y ago

Counterpoint; I would give serious pause to hiring someone who didn't think the stock options would ever be worth anything. You have the power to effect that outcome, and giving up that power makes me a decent amount less likely to enjoy working with you.

winrid 5y ago
I worked my butt off for almost a decade under this mentality, built products that make almost 100m a year. I won't see a return probably for another 5-10 years. It's a scam, don't let people like this fool you. You can have a positive impact, yes, but put what you have control over first. Your happiness and compensation that you get twice a month.
- 2143 5y ago
  > compensation that you get twice a month. I dug into this and was surprised to learn that salaries are paid every fortnight in USA. I wonder why. Does anybody know if this is the case even in FAANG companies? Where I'm from it's paid monthly. I think I prefer that.
  - willcipriano 5y ago
    Why do you prefer to wait longer to be paid?
    - LeonidasXIV 5y ago
      Because other payments are monthly (rent, ISP, mobile phone contract, subscriptions - at least in Europe), so having a constant money in <-> money out equilibrium makes sense. Unless these things are also charged every 2 weeks in the US.
      - checker 5y ago
        Plenty of US places pay twice a month, so you get the monthly budget consistency and get your money sooner.
      - beeboop 5y ago
        I think the idea in the US is that if you're having to wait an extra two weeks to get paid, you're essentially having to "float" half your monthly income all the time. This impacts people who are on the poorer end of the scale, and there's a very high percentage of Americans that don't have more than a few hundred dollars to their name.
    - 2143 5y ago
      I think it's more of a psychological thing for me. If I were to get my income every day, that would be very boring. On the other hand if I were to get my income once in 6 months, that would be horrifying. But 1 month seems to be a sweet spot. Double the amount half as often. Other utility bills come in monthly in my country (which is in Asia by the way), so that's a factor as well. But yeah, I can now kind of see the appeal of getting paid every 2 weeks.
croon 5y ago
It depends. Future value is a risk, and the reward is usually granted to founders. If the stock options are offered as compensation assuming a value that amounts to a competing salary, that means you are taking on founder risk, but without founder award. Thus, either stock option compensation must be much larger than salary, or it should, as GP suggests, be counted as a potential bonus and nothing more.
thinkharderdev 5y ago
The problem is that the relationship between your outcome as a holder of ISOs and the outcome for the company as a whole is pretty opaque. You have no idea what the companies cap table looks like, what sort of liquidity preference the VCs have and what are the various ways in which you can be diluted. If you want to offer people ISOs as a bonus/inventive (i.e. pay a market salary and throw in options as an extra) then great. But if you are asking people to trade off salary for a financial instrument that can't possibly be valued with the information available to then it is kind of shitty to be upset when someone gives them an implicit value of 0.
- TameAntelope 5y ago
  What do you mean, "You have no idea what the company's cap table looks like"? Ask! I mean yeah, if you don't know those things sure, it becomes a lot harder to understand, but I've been given that information when I've asked so far, and I would pass that information along now as well.
allisdust 5y ago
Then you honestly don't understand how screwed up common stock with its multiple clauses is. Not only can employees not significantly change the liquidation outcome of a company below certain level (leadership etc), but even if they could/will and the company ends up with a great liquidation event, the rewards to employees won't be proportional. Which makes the OP's worth zero comment a good way to compare between offers (at the least, assume only a percentage of the potential profits).

muzani 5y ago

I tried to negotiate stock options as part of a compensation with an employer. They seriously considered it and almost gave in. After actually doing the research I realized, they would be worth nearly zero (there was some dodgy stuff on the financial records too). Then I decided to quit because it would be a waste of time and effort working there. Anyway, the moral I took from that was to seriously reconsider working at a place where the stock options are worth nothing. Probably consider consulting for them or something else more cash heavy.

Cthulhu_ 5y ago

I mean I'd take stock options, but only as a bonus, not as a replacement or fill-in for a wage. I've got bills and a mortgage, after all.