|
|
|
|
|
|
by doublerebel
4090 days ago
|
|
|
Unique, glad this is being shared. I've always looked towards the Wealthfront Equity Plan of Early Evergreen Grants [1] as a good example. It is arguably more performance-oriented than this Progressive Equity. I really like the concept of giving everyone financial independence, but it must take the right combination of culture, investors, and valuation to make it more motivating than it is inhibiting. Also, could the redistribution of equity at the time of sale have more cost in tax obligations than earlier redistribution? While I really appreciate the legal docs, the truth is in a longer description that remains easily comprehensible. I think the main barrier to most of these alternative equity structures is a lack of understanding from all parties. [1] https://blog.wealthfront.com/the-right-way-to-grant-equity-t... |
|
|
In practice though, I think it's hard for a lot of companies, because unless you're planning on having a larger % of the company in the employee equity pool in the long-term, you're basically robbing from the size of the up-front grants to feed the follow-on grants. So when you give your employee his or her offer letter, you'll say, "I know this is less than what you're getting at other companies, but if you perform better than 50% of the employees here, you'll end up getting more than what you'd get from other companies." A lot of employees are just going to go for the sure thing, making recruiting harder.
At Detour we do give big follow-on grants, but we can do that because our employee option pool is like 45% or something, which we can only do because I'm funding the company, so it's not really a replicable model (while progressive equity is, I think).