[gen220]

> The only way having an IPO go down on the first day actually hurts an employee is if they start that day or are granted stock or options at the IPO price.

This does routinely happen, because the 409A valuation for the quarter or more prior to an IPO is usually pretty close to the IPO valuation. Anybody who joins a company during that window of time will get ISO grants with unfavorable strike prices (prices close to the IPO price). These options could be worth nothing post-IPO if there’s a slump (in contrast to RSUs, which will always have value).

The difference between a company’s valuation and share price is important but irrelevant to this conversation as far as I can tell. Sorry that imprecise language on my part in my earlier comment created that distraction.

Edit: To be clear, the problem is not the bump or the slump (I tend to agree that it should be irrelevant, and if anything as a shareholder you may prefer a rational slump). Rather, it's the practice of granting ISOs at a soon-to-be market strike price that is the problem. The people with unfavorable ISO strike prices should be upset due to the strike price, not any slump or bump; but if there's a slump, they usually (incorrectly, IMO) blame the slump, and so the slump gets a bad rap internally. On the flip side, although I've never been in the position to make this decision, I find it unconscionable to offer ISOs as part of a compensation package within 6 months of an anticipated IPO date.