4 ms·
I think someone's skewing the poll. Personal wealth follows a powerlaw distribution, and there's good reason to believe that income from stock options is somew
by mixmax 13y ago
I think someone's skewing the poll.
Personal wealth follows a powerlaw distribution, and there's good reason to believe that income from stock options is somewhat similar. If you look at the numbers above they make reasonably sense except for the "in the hundreds of millions" which is far too high compared to the others. The "in the hundreds" and "in the thousands" should be higher, but I'd wager that that can be explained by people not getting stock options in the hundred or thousand dollar range. The paper work alone would cost more. It's expected that there are a few, since a stock can tank, so stock options initially worth millions can turn into thousands when cashed in.
- bsims 13y agoI don't think it necessarily has to be evenly distributed. If you think about options people probably either A) Made a good amount of money or B) Made none at all. Most companies issuing options are likely venture backed and not going to settle for a marginal gain. Thoughts?
- FireBeyond 13y agoMaybe there's some old school Microsoft types, etc., because other than that I'm skeptical that only 8 people have made 'tens of millions', but 35 have made 'hundreds of millions or more' (or that 35 have made that at all)...
- mixmax 13y agoI think it is, based on the fact that (as I mentioned in the GP) wealth follows a powerlaw distribution. I don't see why options wouldn't follow this trend, particularly because market cap of companies in an economy also follows a powerlaw. These are the two factors involved in options.
- ealloc 13y agoActually, wealth follows an exponential distribution for the lower 95% of individuals (by wealth) [1]. However, yes, it does follow a power law for the 5% richest. [1] http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0103544 http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0103544