4 ms·
Depends how you define insider. Employees were subject to a 6 month lockup and during that time the price dropped dramatically, but they still had to pay taxes
by redeux 2y ago
Depends how you define insider. Employees were subject to a 6 month lockup and during that time the price dropped dramatically, but they still had to pay taxes on the $80 IPO price. Execs and institutional investors that were able to sell at IPO made out quite well though.
- guelo 2y agoExecs are employees, were they really exempt from the lockout? Seems unethical.
- Ancalagon 2y agothats preferred stock baby. Startups still a scam to work for.
- bolognafairy 2y agoThere are always haves and have-nots, lol. “Tech” isn’t exempted.
- nemo44x 2y agoNearly certainly they were not. Any stock holder would be blacked out including existing investors.
- redeux 2y agoThat’s simply not true. You can look at the SEC filings and see exactly who was able to liquidate during the IPO. I’m not passing judgment as to whether that’s “good” or “bad.” It simply is.
- AcerbicZero 2y agoToo bad you can't sell the option to buy your shares the day you get them at whatever price you want :/
- paulddraper 2y ago> they still had to pay taxes on the $80 IPO price They will get capital losses. That's not perfect.
- glenngillen 2y agoIt's really not. Let me know if you find any lenders that will let me pay off a mortgage with a capital loss. At least in the startup narrative that circulates on HN, most early employees at a company with that kind of IPO would hope to have a lottery like level of financial windfall. Now their upside is if they manage to get luck a second time they get to offset their winnings? :/
- paulddraper 2y ago> Let me know if you find any lenders that will let me pay off a mortgage with a capital loss. I don't. But the IRS will let you pay your taxes that way. It obviously depends how much equity vs income you're talking about.