|
|
|
Occupations
- Thread starter Canuckles
- Start date
Agree, if I saw a string of 12-month stints on the resume, that would be a red flag to me.
With the exception of the very first job I got out of university, the shortest term job I ever stayed at was 5 years.
Just under 13 years at the last job I had.
I know a few people that played the startup game. Some as employees, some as founders. The employees used the jump in and out to rejoin former employers way up the salary table when startup didnt look like it would pan out. One founder is serial and working on another ev startup. Another founder is still in his first company doing ok but chasing the big carrot of a buyout.
For every person who got in at the ground floor at an Apple, there are 1000s of failed start-ups whose employees worked for nothing but the promise of equity, which never materialized.
This story is actually the norm, not the exception for tech startups.
It does not need to be a start up and yes Apple is an exception - many companies offer stock options to keep workers
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/Employee-Stock-Option-fffca69f497d469f9e0f6b0da712b06d.jpg)
www.investopedia.com
moneysmart.gov.au
There is a lot room between ...working for nothing for a startup and taking some of your compensation in shares of an established company with a stock option plan.
Employee Stock Options (ESOs): A Complete Guide
Employee stock options (ESOs) are a grant awarded to an employee giving them the right to buy a certain number of shares of the company's stock for a set price.
Employee share schemes - Moneysmart.gov.au
The pros and cons of employee share schemes and what to check before buying shares this way.
moneysmart.gov.au
These days staff loyalty is often seen as a very high priority.
There is a lot room between ...working for nothing for a startup and taking some of your compensation in shares of an established company with a stock option plan.
I was involved with a startup biotech company when I came here. Luckily I was paid by the university that the start up came from rather than the actual comany. It made a lot of people quite rich and never sold a single thing. I was actually pretty disgusted. It was all smoke/mirrors/hype/market manipulation/licensing deals. It folded eventually leaving patient groups disappointed (they’d been told of a great new therapy coming) and lower staff without a job but with the board quite well off.
Any other start ups I come across I have a serious look at now. I’ve turned down two others. One folded not long after I interviewed and told them I wasn’t interested, the other is still going but shifted everything away from their original base (why I turned that one down).
Anyone asks me for advice about working for a start up I tell them to do their due diligence, do they actually have any customers already or is everything just a promise still? Is the promise built on hype and spin or does it have a real foundation? It’s always going to be a gamble and most of them will fold.
Any other start ups I come across I have a serious look at now. I’ve turned down two others. One folded not long after I interviewed and told them I wasn’t interested, the other is still going but shifted everything away from their original base (why I turned that one down).
Anyone asks me for advice about working for a start up I tell them to do their due diligence, do they actually have any customers already or is everything just a promise still? Is the promise built on hype and spin or does it have a real foundation? It’s always going to be a gamble and most of them will fold.
Aquaintance was the salesman for a concussion research program with a start up . They literally sold zero in three yrs , encouraging employees to invest , put skin in the game for the big payout . When the company stalled , they took it public . Its shares are worth .002 cents . But the principal owners all get paid quite well . If your into a startup , be on the board of directors.
Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com
Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com
One of the benefits of my time with an engineering consultant was the opportunity to jump jobs when an opening came up.
Within 5 years, I worked on 3 different projects with each role higher than the last.
On the CV it looks great, because it's 5 years with one employer...but 3 different projects within the same company doesn't indicate jumping.
Plus in our business...if someone sits in a role/project for too long...it raises eyebrows.
EDIT: only issue is your salary doesn’t really change, so that’s negative. But they come up with perks. When they sent me to BC it was a nice 2x factor on salary because they screwed up and didn’t know the OT was calculated at 1.5x (including myself). So a nice surprise.
Last edited:
Telecom Tech/Eng/Mgnt here (30 years). Education originally in Electrical/Electronics and separately much later in Mechanical/Manufacturing (for ***** and giggles).
As for jumping. IME how it is seen depends a lot on investment/training requirement vs hired gun. If an employer needs to invest a lot in (train) the new hire they will not like jumpers (which could be process and not specifically knowledge). If the new hire will hit the floor running it matters less (has all the skills/knowledge)--middle ground. If the new hire is really a hired gun (needed for a short to mid term skill-set or problem) it matters very little and may be an advantage as once that short term problem has passed odds are they move on--on their own. Not hard and fast but this is why start-ups/consulting typically see it differently than well established companies.
Always leave on good terms. As an example, I left for a start-up over a decade ago, we sold to my previous employer... all good.
As for jumping. IME how it is seen depends a lot on investment/training requirement vs hired gun. If an employer needs to invest a lot in (train) the new hire they will not like jumpers (which could be process and not specifically knowledge). If the new hire will hit the floor running it matters less (has all the skills/knowledge)--middle ground. If the new hire is really a hired gun (needed for a short to mid term skill-set or problem) it matters very little and may be an advantage as once that short term problem has passed odds are they move on--on their own. Not hard and fast but this is why start-ups/consulting typically see it differently than well established companies.
Always leave on good terms. As an example, I left for a start-up over a decade ago, we sold to my previous employer... all good.
I found that as I got older, what I wanted from a job changed. If the job could not provide what I required, I looked elsewhere.
It was never a surprise that once I gave my notice the true colours really shined through and this only confirmed my decision to leave.
It should also be noted that one should keep their expectations in check and give a company and themselves adequate time to ensure they are making an educated decision.
It was never a surprise that once I gave my notice the true colours really shined through and this only confirmed my decision to leave.
It should also be noted that one should keep their expectations in check and give a company and themselves adequate time to ensure they are making an educated decision.
If I make a move from where I am now...I will be asking either for a stupid amount of money, or a stake in the company / be a shareholder.
Outside of that...no.
remember w/o about 33% you don't have much say on the board
Last edited:
In the industry he is in, outside of starting his own company, he is not getting 34%. Ownership stakes are normally <<10% and often <1%. On the upside, even if he was offered a chance to buy 34%, there is no way he could raise enough cash and even financing it would be brutal as the numbers are too big. It the buyins I have knowledge of, numbers were in the low to mid six figures (paid with after tax dollars) for single digit (or even a fraction of a single digit) percentage ownership.
This is correct. @timtune a 33% is effectively impossible for the companies I would go for.
The amount of shares available is limited, and my previous employer was private...but they had shareholders that would get paid out a very nice dividend (30%) or so, and they offered 35 shares as a start to some...with 1-2% financing through a big bank.
I'd be OK with that, the 35 shares would be a drop in the bucket...but as they are worth (last I checked) 600-700 each...it's easier to buy up in small portions.
One of the reasons I left. They refused to let me buy in after 5 years, so I walked away.
If you’re working for a successful company and they offer shares , they want to keep you on side . If it’s a struggling company they are raising cash, sometime not being an owner makes walking a lot easier .
Really successful companies often have no need or desire to split the cake into more pieces.
Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com
Really successful companies often have no need or desire to split the cake into more pieces.
Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com
Agree.
I didn't get shares when I told them I'm leaving, my buddy didn't get shares. But 2 others we know were planning on leaving were provided the opportunity to buy shares and promoted.
Guess we saw who was more important!
I was just a lowly site guy, so I floated from project to project and enjoyed it. I was never (and even know) a 'core' member of the engineering team (and I didn't want to be).
Sometimes the old guys are ready to get out. That requires a huge infusion of cash to buy out their shares as they conceivably do have majority ownership that they want to sell. That either triggers a sale to a larger company or letting many staff buy in to generate the cash infusion. I have seen a few of those happen but want no part of it. When >50% of the employees are owners, nobody gets rich and you can't easily jump ship.
|
|
|
|
|