I hereby claim:
- I am impressthenet on github.
- I am dougm (https://keybase.io/dougm) on keybase.
- I have a public key whose fingerprint is 5C22 F7BD 6BEC 80B9 27A8 AB9A 280C 615D 1C70 3E9D
To claim this, I am signing this object:
I hereby claim:
To claim this, I am signing this object:
JD Maturen, 2016/07/05, San Francisco, CA
As has been much discussed, stock options as used today are not a practical or reliable way of compensating employees of fast growing startups. With an often high strike price, a large tax burden on execution due to AMT, and a 90 day execution window after leaving the company many share options are left unexecuted.
There have been a variety of proposed modifications to how equity is distributed to address these issues for individual employees. However, there hasn't been much discussion of how these modifications will change overall ownership dynamics of startups. In this post we'll dive into the situation as it stands today where there is very near 100% equity loss when employees leave companies pre-exit and then we'll look at what would happen if there were instead a 0% loss rate.
What we'll see is that employees gain nearly 3-fold, while both founders and investors – particularly early investors – get dilute
Disclaimer: This piece is written anonymously. The names of a few particular companies are mentioned, but as common examples only.
This is a short write-up on things that I wish I'd known and considered before joining a private company (aka startup, aka unicorn in some cases). I'm not trying to make the case that you should never join a private company, but the power imbalance between founder and employee is extreme, and that potential candidates would