5 ms·

I applaud them for making sure their own ownership of the company is not diluted, which is something I wish more founders were able to demand when they seek fin

I applaud them for making sure their own ownership of the company is not diluted, which is something I wish more founders were able to demand when they seek financing. On the other hand, to me it seems like the main goal is to be able to provide RSUs and stock grants to employees without the right to vote, which I think is not right.

davidw 15y ago
> On the other hand, to me it seems like the main goal is to be able to provide RSUs and stock grants to employees without the right to vote, which I think is not right. Well, it doesn't sound very good to me either, but luckily, a great many of their employees are extremely highly skilled individuals who can easily find work with other employers, should they not like the conditions.
- dpark 15y ago
  Obviously employee mobility means an employer can do nothing wrong...
  - davidw 15y ago
    You're taking what I said and making a very black and white statement from it, which does nothing to further a good discussion of the subject. We're not talking about inhumane working conditions here, backbreaking labor, or an employer risking people's lives to make some extra bucks.
    - dpark 15y ago
      You're trying to make a false distinction between small immoralities and big immoralities. If Google is doing something immoral with respect to its employees, the fact that those employees can depart is irrelevant. Employee freedom does not neutralize employer immoralities, no matter what the size of those immoralities. Now, if you want to argue that what Google is doing is not immoral, then fair enough. I might even agree with you. But if we're taking it as a given that this action is wrong, then employee freedom doesn't make it right.
      - davidw 15y ago
        Exposing someone to danger because you're too cheap to pay for proper safety is what I'd consider immoral. Not offering employees a certain class of shares is maybe lame, but not in the slightest what I consider immoral.
        dpark 15y ago
        That's reasonable.
gregable 15y ago
Assuming the price difference is small, an employee could sell their C share on the market and immediately buy an A share.
- Drbble 15y ago
  But there is going to be very little selling in voting shares. People will prefer to sell their nonvoting shares first.

davidw 15y ago

> On the other hand, to me it seems like the main goal is to be able to provide RSUs and stock grants to employees without the right to vote, which I think is not right. Well, it doesn't sound very good to me either, but luckily, a great many of their employees are extremely highly skilled individuals who can easily find work with other employers, should they not like the conditions.

dpark 15y ago
Obviously employee mobility means an employer can do nothing wrong...
- davidw 15y ago
  You're taking what I said and making a very black and white statement from it, which does nothing to further a good discussion of the subject. We're not talking about inhumane working conditions here, backbreaking labor, or an employer risking people's lives to make some extra bucks.
  - dpark 15y ago
    You're trying to make a false distinction between small immoralities and big immoralities. If Google is doing something immoral with respect to its employees, the fact that those employees can depart is irrelevant. Employee freedom does not neutralize employer immoralities, no matter what the size of those immoralities. Now, if you want to argue that what Google is doing is not immoral, then fair enough. I might even agree with you. But if we're taking it as a given that this action is wrong, then employee freedom doesn't make it right.
    - davidw 15y ago
      Exposing someone to danger because you're too cheap to pay for proper safety is what I'd consider immoral. Not offering employees a certain class of shares is maybe lame, but not in the slightest what I consider immoral.
      - dpark 15y ago
        That's reasonable.

gregable 15y ago

Assuming the price difference is small, an employee could sell their C share on the market and immediately buy an A share.

Drbble 15y ago
But there is going to be very little selling in voting shares. People will prefer to sell their nonvoting shares first.