7 ms·

Valid reasons, but quick search for "option", "stock", "shares" did not find anything in that post - strange.

jacalulu 13y ago
Honestly, stock options never crossed my mind as a valid reason to stay. They are a nice to have for sure - but they played no role in me wanting to stay. I understand for some people this is a huge incentive, but just not for me.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- CmonDev 13y ago
  Why not work for a charity then? I am sure they need IT people.
michaelochurch 13y ago
Stock options shouldn't be a "huge incentive" unless you're a founder, or one of the first five employees and very good at negotiating. For typical employee package, there just isn't enough to justify staying in a mediocre role. OP got stuck on low-end work and wasn't learning anything. She got shitty reviews. That doesn't mean she did a bad job or is incompetent (I doubt either is true) but it means they didn't value her, and she made the right call by getting out. If she'd stayed just to vest a few hundred shares of MSFT-- I doubt this benefit rang out to more than $10k per year-- she'd be nuts.
- skyraider 13y ago
  Is there a scale somewhere where I could calculate the expected percentage a very good negotiator with appropriate leverage would be able to extract in the best-case scenario, based on employee # and some metric of value-add?
  - michaelochurch 13y ago
    Take your pay cut (as a percentage, negative) and add 2/3 times your equity value at-current-valuation, divided by the vesting period, as a percentage of market salary. For example, if market is $125k, and you're making $100k + 0.2% of a company worth $100M, that's: Equity is worth 200k over 4 years, or 50k/year. (40% of market salary.) -20 (paycut) + 40 = 20 Here's how you evaluate it. Below 0: Fucking awful. They don't respect you. Leave. 0 to 25: Mediocre, not interesting. OK for an otherwise attractive job. 25 to 60: Substantial but probably not life-changing equity. Typical for good contributors. 60 to 200: Real equity. They want you. They care if you work there. 200+: Founder-level.

Honestly, stock options never crossed my mind as a valid reason to stay. They are a nice to have for sure - but they played no role in me wanting to stay. I understand for some people this is a huge incentive, but just not for me.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
CmonDev 13y ago
Why not work for a charity then? I am sure they need IT people.

michaelochurch 13y ago

Stock options shouldn't be a "huge incentive" unless you're a founder, or one of the first five employees and very good at negotiating. For typical employee package, there just isn't enough to justify staying in a mediocre role. OP got stuck on low-end work and wasn't learning anything. She got shitty reviews. That doesn't mean she did a bad job or is incompetent (I doubt either is true) but it means they didn't value her, and she made the right call by getting out. If she'd stayed just to vest a few hundred shares of MSFT-- I doubt this benefit rang out to more than $10k per year-- she'd be nuts.

skyraider 13y ago
Is there a scale somewhere where I could calculate the expected percentage a very good negotiator with appropriate leverage would be able to extract in the best-case scenario, based on employee # and some metric of value-add?
- michaelochurch 13y ago
  Take your pay cut (as a percentage, negative) and add 2/3 times your equity value at-current-valuation, divided by the vesting period, as a percentage of market salary. For example, if market is $125k, and you're making $100k + 0.2% of a company worth $100M, that's: Equity is worth 200k over 4 years, or 50k/year. (40% of market salary.) -20 (paycut) + 40 = 20 Here's how you evaluate it. Below 0: Fucking awful. They don't respect you. Leave. 0 to 25: Mediocre, not interesting. OK for an otherwise attractive job. 25 to 60: Substantial but probably not life-changing equity. Typical for good contributors. 60 to 200: Real equity. They want you. They care if you work there. 200+: Founder-level.