[itzprime]

The majority of companies don't give equity in the world. And those who do only give it to certain employees. As they don't violate RSU or stock compensation plans they didn't withheld equities. If I created a successful company, I would also say that I would never sell. However $12B is multi-generational wealth and with it you can do anything you want. So that sum would also pursuade me.

[fastball]

$12B is all your descendants forever if you manage it well.

I mean treating it as a lump sum you only ever pull from without any appreciation in value and you can bankroll your descendants to the tune of $10,000,000 per year for 1200 years.

[smt88]

Well, let's compare apples and apples. The majority of US-based software companies give equity, especially in earlier stages.

[markmark]

And mailchimp's employees could have chosen to work for any one of those if equity was important to them. No one was tricked here.

[MAGZine]

"We're not giving you equity; we're never going to sell."

If the explanation the company gives you for not giving equity is that they're never going to sell, but they end up selling, how is that not being tricked?

Seems like a pretty cut and dry case of bait and switch. Why even tell people you're never going to sell? How about, "equity is not a part of the compensation package we offer," with no false justification?

Acquisitions suck. Depending on the $ amounts/growth trajectories/timelines/etc I'd potentially take less TC up front to avoid one.

[smt88]

I agree, but it's notable that MailChimp was unusual in this regard.

It's also easier to convince people they'd rather have cash than equity if you tell them the equity will never be liquid.