Hacker News Reader

Comment by break_the_bank | Hacker News Reader

Assuming a standard vesting schedule of 4 years. Wouldn’t you have left with 0.75% of equity?

I wonder if any money would have been left after dilution and preferred shares.

There was no vesting in this case. The shares were explicitly conditional on current employment when they became eligible to be exercised. Mind you I'm next to clueless about options, but I remember that language being in whatever I signed.

Usually there's a 1-year 25% cliff, then the remaining 75% vests monthly over the remaining 3-years, at least that was commonplace a decade ago. So at 3 years on such a schedule you would have been able to exercise 75% of the initial grant.

Based on what valuation? Sell them to who? It was a privately owned company. I doubt I'd have been able to persuade the founder to buy my stake considering I'd signed a thing that said I get nothing if I quit before they exit.

Nothing remotely resembling a standard 4-year vesting schedule...

But being guaranteed 1% stake on exit in writing is in some ways better. Most folks w/options are getting heavily dilluted with every round of funding, but at least they can exercise and move on for more lotto tickets after 1 year.

Every time I visit the valley I buy lottery tickets.

Seems appropriate to me, and more viable.

I can confirm that the kind of option plans as psyc describes them exist. At least in Germany.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com