4 ms·
Moscovitz did not say that employee #100 made $200M at FB. Read the article. First, this was an overly simplistic analysis. It assumes a strike price of $0.0
by erdevs 12y ago
Moscovitz did not say that employee #100 made $200M at FB. Read the article. First, this was an overly simplistic analysis. It assumes a strike price of $0.00... Which never happens, and certainly wouldn't have happened by the time FB hit 100 employees. It assumes full vesting. It assumes no lockup on liquidity. It assumes no dilution from exiting... which, in the real world, never happens.
You can actually see how much money FB's top shareholders were worth at their IPO. Very, very few employees made over $10M. TEN. Before tax.
A lot of people front in SF / the Bay Area. Very, very few are worth over $30M in liquid net worth.
- paulsutter 12y agoWhat do you think the strike price was at 100 employees? I mean seriously. I know a guy who was around number 70 at Google and his strike price was about 30 cents. Correction: The S-1 listed only a handful of the top people.
- onion2k 12y agoI think the 'TEN' was emphasising $10m rather than stating only 10 employees made that much.
- npalli 12y agoIt is worth noting that the S-1 listed one shareholder (among 10 or so individuals) who owned 10 bp of stock. Facebook thought that was worthy of disclosure. Like the commentator above, I'm highly skeptical that employee #100 got 10 bp stock (unless it was matching some google offer etc not something Dustin implied).