<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Facebook options debacle shows lack of liquidity is an issue for startups</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/12/08/facebook-options-debacle-shows-lack-of-liquidity-is-an-issue-for-startups/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/12/08/facebook-options-debacle-shows-lack-of-liquidity-is-an-issue-for-startups/</link>
	<description>Nic Brisbourne's view from London on venture capital and exploiting change in technology and media</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:08:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: alan p</title>
		<link>http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/12/08/facebook-options-debacle-shows-lack-of-liquidity-is-an-issue-for-startups/#comment-4059</link>
		<dc:creator>alan p</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 14:02:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theequitykicker.com/?p=1189#comment-4059</guid>
		<description>A very good rule of thumb from Dotcom experience - if the CEO is taking his/her money before you, run for the hills!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A very good rule of thumb from Dotcom experience &#8211; if the CEO is taking his/her money before you, run for the hills!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: alan p</title>
		<link>http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/12/08/facebook-options-debacle-shows-lack-of-liquidity-is-an-issue-for-startups/#comment-11733</link>
		<dc:creator>alan p</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 14:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theequitykicker.com/?p=1189#comment-11733</guid>
		<description>A very good rule of thumb from Dotcom experience - if the CEO is taking his/her money before you, run for the hills!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A very good rule of thumb from Dotcom experience &#8211; if the CEO is taking his/her money before you, run for the hills!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jens</title>
		<link>http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/12/08/facebook-options-debacle-shows-lack-of-liquidity-is-an-issue-for-startups/#comment-4046</link>
		<dc:creator>Jens</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 18:43:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theequitykicker.com/?p=1189#comment-4046</guid>
		<description>Nic,

am sure you are right. It will affect not just morale, but his credibility as a leader. 

But the point is really this: Zuckerberg can&#039;t &#039;cash out&#039; his employees. He just doesn&#039;t have the cash. Or let&#039;s put it the other way round. Let&#039;s just imagine he bought out his employees. He would essentially tell his employees: &quot;Look, I am cashing you out, this means your shares are undervalued, thanks a lot for giving them to me.&quot; 

What you need is a market for the shares outside of the company&#039;s control. Where people can trade their shares with other people. Oh, wait, that is called a public market...bugger...back to the drawing board. 

What it essentially shows is that companies that should actually be publicly-listed aren&#039;t. Maybe Obama is intelligent enough to understand this problem and remove Sarbanes-Oxley. It sure didn&#039;t prevent the credit crunch. All it does is slow everybody else down.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nic,</p>
<p>am sure you are right. It will affect not just morale, but his credibility as a leader. </p>
<p>But the point is really this: Zuckerberg can&#8217;t &#8216;cash out&#8217; his employees. He just doesn&#8217;t have the cash. Or let&#8217;s put it the other way round. Let&#8217;s just imagine he bought out his employees. He would essentially tell his employees: &#8220;Look, I am cashing you out, this means your shares are undervalued, thanks a lot for giving them to me.&#8221; </p>
<p>What you need is a market for the shares outside of the company&#8217;s control. Where people can trade their shares with other people. Oh, wait, that is called a public market&#8230;bugger&#8230;back to the drawing board. </p>
<p>What it essentially shows is that companies that should actually be publicly-listed aren&#8217;t. Maybe Obama is intelligent enough to understand this problem and remove Sarbanes-Oxley. It sure didn&#8217;t prevent the credit crunch. All it does is slow everybody else down.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jens</title>
		<link>http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/12/08/facebook-options-debacle-shows-lack-of-liquidity-is-an-issue-for-startups/#comment-11734</link>
		<dc:creator>Jens</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 18:43:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theequitykicker.com/?p=1189#comment-11734</guid>
		<description>Nic,

am sure you are right. It will affect not just morale, but his credibility as a leader. 

But the point is really this: Zuckerberg can&#039;t &#039;cash out&#039; his employees. He just doesn&#039;t have the cash. Or let&#039;s put it the other way round. Let&#039;s just imagine he bought out his employees. He would essentially tell his employees: &quot;Look, I am cashing you out, this means your shares are undervalued, thanks a lot for giving them to me.&quot; 

What you need is a market for the shares outside of the company&#039;s control. Where people can trade their shares with other people. Oh, wait, that is called a public market...bugger...back to the drawing board. 

What it essentially shows is that companies that should actually be publicly-listed aren&#039;t. Maybe Obama is intelligent enough to understand this problem and remove Sarbanes-Oxley. It sure didn&#039;t prevent the credit crunch. All it does is slow everybody else down.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nic,</p>
<p>am sure you are right. It will affect not just morale, but his credibility as a leader. </p>
<p>But the point is really this: Zuckerberg can&#8217;t &#8216;cash out&#8217; his employees. He just doesn&#8217;t have the cash. Or let&#8217;s put it the other way round. Let&#8217;s just imagine he bought out his employees. He would essentially tell his employees: &#8220;Look, I am cashing you out, this means your shares are undervalued, thanks a lot for giving them to me.&#8221; </p>
<p>What you need is a market for the shares outside of the company&#8217;s control. Where people can trade their shares with other people. Oh, wait, that is called a public market&#8230;bugger&#8230;back to the drawing board. </p>
<p>What it essentially shows is that companies that should actually be publicly-listed aren&#8217;t. Maybe Obama is intelligent enough to understand this problem and remove Sarbanes-Oxley. It sure didn&#8217;t prevent the credit crunch. All it does is slow everybody else down.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nic</title>
		<link>http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/12/08/facebook-options-debacle-shows-lack-of-liquidity-is-an-issue-for-startups/#comment-4043</link>
		<dc:creator>nic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 16:58:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theequitykicker.com/?p=1189#comment-4043</guid>
		<description>Hi Chris - tks for the comment.  I think the thing that was a bit different about Facebook is that the option is still open to Zuckerberg to cash out his employees if he wants to - the issue is valuation.  That makes it a little different to the markets closing for IPOs, which everyone understands is outside the CEO&#039;s control.

I&#039;m sure you&#039;re right that nothing was promised in the legal sense.  I used the word more loosely than that.  The key here is what people expected, and if they really thought they were going to get some cash then they will be disappointed, and that will hit moral.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Chris &#8211; tks for the comment.  I think the thing that was a bit different about Facebook is that the option is still open to Zuckerberg to cash out his employees if he wants to &#8211; the issue is valuation.  That makes it a little different to the markets closing for IPOs, which everyone understands is outside the CEO&#8217;s control.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sure you&#8217;re right that nothing was promised in the legal sense.  I used the word more loosely than that.  The key here is what people expected, and if they really thought they were going to get some cash then they will be disappointed, and that will hit moral.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nic</title>
		<link>http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/12/08/facebook-options-debacle-shows-lack-of-liquidity-is-an-issue-for-startups/#comment-11735</link>
		<dc:creator>nic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 16:58:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theequitykicker.com/?p=1189#comment-11735</guid>
		<description>Hi Chris - tks for the comment.  I think the thing that was a bit different about Facebook is that the option is still open to Zuckerberg to cash out his employees if he wants to - the issue is valuation.  That makes it a little different to the markets closing for IPOs, which everyone understands is outside the CEO&#039;s control.

I&#039;m sure you&#039;re right that nothing was promised in the legal sense.  I used the word more loosely than that.  The key here is what people expected, and if they really thought they were going to get some cash then they will be disappointed, and that will hit moral.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Chris &#8211; tks for the comment.  I think the thing that was a bit different about Facebook is that the option is still open to Zuckerberg to cash out his employees if he wants to &#8211; the issue is valuation.  That makes it a little different to the markets closing for IPOs, which everyone understands is outside the CEO&#8217;s control.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sure you&#8217;re right that nothing was promised in the legal sense.  I used the word more loosely than that.  The key here is what people expected, and if they really thought they were going to get some cash then they will be disappointed, and that will hit moral.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chrisco</title>
		<link>http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/12/08/facebook-options-debacle-shows-lack-of-liquidity-is-an-issue-for-startups/#comment-4042</link>
		<dc:creator>chrisco</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 16:42:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theequitykicker.com/?p=1189#comment-4042</guid>
		<description>Lack if liquidity is (and has always been) an issue for everybody.  Everybody knows (or should know!) that the financing and liquidity window for companies and employees is just like any other window, it cycles from open to closed.

Regarding Facebook&#039;s options plan: I don&#039;t think they made any promises, did they?  I&#039;m sure everything was hedged (i.e. &quot;we are trying to set up this program, but don&#039;t know if or when it will go into effect&quot;).  If it wasn&#039;t, then what the hell are they paying their attorneys and Zuck&#039;s handlers for?!  Still, it was asking for trouble (even stupid?) to announce something like that before it locked down.  That&#039;s what you get with a 24-year old CEO?  That and the privacy and other blunders?

The startup I joined in 1999 went public in December 2001.  It was supposed to go happen sooner, but 9/11 closed the window for everyone.  Everyone understood.  Now is another window-closing crisis.  I&#039;m sure everybody understands.  Like anything else that&#039;s subject to a window of opportunity, you don&#039;t count your liquidity until the wire clears and the clawbacks, short put options, or other things have expired.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lack if liquidity is (and has always been) an issue for everybody.  Everybody knows (or should know!) that the financing and liquidity window for companies and employees is just like any other window, it cycles from open to closed.</p>
<p>Regarding Facebook&#8217;s options plan: I don&#8217;t think they made any promises, did they?  I&#8217;m sure everything was hedged (i.e. &#8220;we are trying to set up this program, but don&#8217;t know if or when it will go into effect&#8221;).  If it wasn&#8217;t, then what the hell are they paying their attorneys and Zuck&#8217;s handlers for?!  Still, it was asking for trouble (even stupid?) to announce something like that before it locked down.  That&#8217;s what you get with a 24-year old CEO?  That and the privacy and other blunders?</p>
<p>The startup I joined in 1999 went public in December 2001.  It was supposed to go happen sooner, but 9/11 closed the window for everyone.  Everyone understood.  Now is another window-closing crisis.  I&#8217;m sure everybody understands.  Like anything else that&#8217;s subject to a window of opportunity, you don&#8217;t count your liquidity until the wire clears and the clawbacks, short put options, or other things have expired.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chrisco</title>
		<link>http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/12/08/facebook-options-debacle-shows-lack-of-liquidity-is-an-issue-for-startups/#comment-11736</link>
		<dc:creator>chrisco</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 16:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theequitykicker.com/?p=1189#comment-11736</guid>
		<description>Lack if liquidity is (and has always been) an issue for everybody.  Everybody knows (or should know!) that the financing and liquidity window for companies and employees is just like any other window, it cycles from open to closed.

Regarding Facebook&#039;s options plan: I don&#039;t think they made any promises, did they?  I&#039;m sure everything was hedged (i.e. &quot;we are trying to set up this program, but don&#039;t know if or when it will go into effect&quot;).  If it wasn&#039;t, then what the hell are they paying their attorneys and Zuck&#039;s handlers for?!  Still, it was asking for trouble (even stupid?) to announce something like that before it locked down.  That&#039;s what you get with a 24-year old CEO?  That and the privacy and other blunders?

The startup I joined in 1999 went public in December 2001.  It was supposed to go happen sooner, but 9/11 closed the window for everyone.  Everyone understood.  Now is another window-closing crisis.  I&#039;m sure everybody understands.  Like anything else that&#039;s subject to a window of opportunity, you don&#039;t count your liquidity until the wire clears and the clawbacks, short put options, or other things have expired.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lack if liquidity is (and has always been) an issue for everybody.  Everybody knows (or should know!) that the financing and liquidity window for companies and employees is just like any other window, it cycles from open to closed.</p>
<p>Regarding Facebook&#8217;s options plan: I don&#8217;t think they made any promises, did they?  I&#8217;m sure everything was hedged (i.e. &#8220;we are trying to set up this program, but don&#8217;t know if or when it will go into effect&#8221;).  If it wasn&#8217;t, then what the hell are they paying their attorneys and Zuck&#8217;s handlers for?!  Still, it was asking for trouble (even stupid?) to announce something like that before it locked down.  That&#8217;s what you get with a 24-year old CEO?  That and the privacy and other blunders?</p>
<p>The startup I joined in 1999 went public in December 2001.  It was supposed to go happen sooner, but 9/11 closed the window for everyone.  Everyone understood.  Now is another window-closing crisis.  I&#8217;m sure everybody understands.  Like anything else that&#8217;s subject to a window of opportunity, you don&#8217;t count your liquidity until the wire clears and the clawbacks, short put options, or other things have expired.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.241 seconds -->

