Hacker News Reader

Comment by ditonal | Hacker News Reader

Sure, the primary objective is a huge IPO. It's the playbook in the sense of it was plan B to break even by cutting employees out. Investors might have not made out, but they broke even, and scratched the back of execs who can repay the favor in other contexts.

View on HN

What do you mean cutting employees out? Cutting them out of what? Their were no returns made on the investor's capital. There's nothing to be cut out from.

Taking investor's money and building a company that is only worth the value of what the investors put in and then being pissed you didn't get rich in the process is pretty nuts.

Who's talking about getting rich?

If investors are breaking even then employees deserve to at least not be losing out thanks to taxes. Preferably they should get enough return to roughly make up for any salary loss they took in exchange for equity.

If the VCs start raking in cash then employees should too.

The story here is execs made money (6 million for the CEO), VCs roughly broke even, employees got screwed over. That, IMO, is completely immoral and shouldn't be allowed to happen.

Employees only lost money due to taxes because they tried to manipulate their tax rates. There's really on the employees, not anyone else.

I agree with you about the CEO.

"Manipulate their tax rates" --- how very callous! VCs pay very little taxes on their take (carried interest), CEO walks away with 6+ million, and employees who have spent a big chunk of their most valuable resource --- their time --- try to set their long term capital gains clock ticking, taking on a huge tax risk in the process. Calling that tax manipulation is just outrageous.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com