[ampersandy]

They wouldn't — and Mailchimp employees didn't. The market value of your labour is what you can get a company to pay you.

The hypothetical market value of employees in a world where Mailchimp did offer equity and employees stuck it out to reap that upside doesn't exist, so arguing the point makes no sense.

[bjourne]

The value of one's labour is the value it generates - not what anyone is willing to pay for it. The value of the cumulative labour of Mailchimp's engineers is $12 billion which vastly exceeds the amount it was sold for.

[WastingMyTime89]

> The value of the cumulative labour of Mailchimp's engineers is $12 billion

No, that's the value of MailChimp as a company. That includes the product, the branding, the management and the customer base.

> The value of one's labour is the value it generates - not what anyone is willing to pay for it.

The market value of anything is exactly the value that anyone is willing to pay for it and that's the only value that actually matters in this case. No one knows the exact value that anyone specifically contributes on a large project. How much of MailChimp value is due to its engineers and how much is due to its sales team? The only thing sure is how much the company agreed to pay its emgineers and that didn't include equity.

If you want to own parts of the company you work for, go work for a company giving equities. If you work for a company which doesn't, you are not entitied to a part of the company value when it's sold. That's literally the meaning of being an employee.

[bjourne]

> No, that's the value of MailChimp as a company. That includes the product, the branding, the management and the customer base.

How did all these valuables come into existence? Through the employees labour. Thus the value of this labour must be equal to the value of these assets.

> The market value of anything is exactly the value that anyone is willing to pay for it

I never used the term "market value". Sorry if that is what you thought I meant, despite that I didn't use the term. And no, market value is not the only or the best way to measure value.

[ampersandy]

> The value of the cumulative labour of Mailchimp's engineers is $12 billion which vastly exceeds the amount it was sold for.

Yes, that's how employment works. Companies do not pay you exactly the same $$ you generate, that's just common sense? Why would they employ you if you cost just as much profit as you generate?

The question here is whether Mailchimp _exploited_ its employees by not offering equity. Unless an employee was lied to and told they might later receive equity, they all joined under the assumption that they were making a mutually beneficial agreement, and that the compensation offered by Mailchimp was worthwhile (as opposed to going and starting their own company or working for another startup that offered equity).

Every Mailchimp employee was welcome to start their own company if they wanted to capture 100% of the profits they generated.

[bjourne]

> The question here is whether Mailchimp _exploited_ its employees by not offering equity.

No. The question is whether Mailchimp's employees would have worked for Mailchimp had they had a completely free choice and good knowledge of the value of their labour (e.g. valuation of the company).