| 1 | |
| 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:08,080 | |
| While discussing the ATOM 60 stock options framework, we mentioned that when you think | |
| 2 | |
| 00:00:08,080 --> 00:00:14,000 | |
| about how many stock options to grant to an individual employee, you must bear in mind | |
| 3 | |
| 00:00:14,000 --> 00:00:17,720 | |
| that the financial benefit to that employee must be attractive. | |
| 4 | |
| 00:00:17,720 --> 00:00:22,800 | |
| We also discussed that attractiveness can be quite subjective and usually depends on | |
| 5 | |
| 00:00:22,800 --> 00:00:27,360 | |
| the earning capacity or annual worth of an individual. | |
| 6 | |
| 00:00:27,360 --> 00:00:33,440 | |
| So a benefit of $200,000 in four years might seem attractive to someone earning $50,000 | |
| 7 | |
| 00:00:33,440 --> 00:00:39,120 | |
| a year, but may not seem so attractive to someone earning $100 million a year. | |
| 8 | |
| 00:00:39,120 --> 00:00:43,560 | |
| So how do you decide what the intended benefit must be? | |
| 9 | |
| 00:00:43,560 --> 00:00:50,920 | |
| Well, you look at it with respect to their criticality rating and their annual worth. | |
| 10 | |
| 00:00:50,920 --> 00:00:56,520 | |
| Let us say you have an employee in a senior role that bears the highest criticality rating | |
| 11 | |
| 00:00:56,520 --> 00:01:03,160 | |
| a drawing a salary of $75,000 per annum because they have taken a pay cut, but their market | |
| 12 | |
| 00:01:03,160 --> 00:01:06,800 | |
| worth is $200,000 per annum. | |
| 13 | |
| 00:01:06,800 --> 00:01:10,680 | |
| What would be an attractive intended benefit for such a role? | |
| 14 | |
| 00:01:10,680 --> 00:01:16,720 | |
| Also, being a startup, let us consider a horizon of say four years, after which you expect this | |
| 15 | |
| 00:01:16,720 --> 00:01:19,560 | |
| individual to earn that benefit. | |
| 16 | |
| 00:01:19,560 --> 00:01:24,120 | |
| You would also waste those options over four years and you might assume a liquidity event | |
| 17 | |
| 00:01:24,120 --> 00:01:30,680 | |
| of some sort, which means someone willing to buy your shares after about four years. | |
| 18 | |
| 00:01:30,680 --> 00:01:37,480 | |
| So we have a senior role rated criticality A with a market worth of $200,000 per annum. | |
| 19 | |
| 00:01:37,480 --> 00:01:43,760 | |
| What would be an attractive intended benefit for such a person after four years? | |
| 20 | |
| 00:01:43,760 --> 00:01:48,360 | |
| While we will provide you with a few guidelines, I want you to think about this along with | |
| 21 | |
| 00:01:48,360 --> 00:01:49,360 | |
| me. | |
| 22 | |
| 00:01:49,720 --> 00:01:51,480 | |
| Let us start small. | |
| 23 | |
| 00:01:51,480 --> 00:01:57,960 | |
| Would earning an extra $25,000 from stock options after four years be very attractive? | |
| 24 | |
| 00:01:57,960 --> 00:01:59,960 | |
| Probably not. | |
| 25 | |
| 00:01:59,960 --> 00:02:06,120 | |
| While some money is better than no money, it may not exactly classify as very attractive | |
| 26 | |
| 00:02:06,120 --> 00:02:09,040 | |
| at a senior criticality. | |
| 27 | |
| 00:02:09,040 --> 00:02:12,520 | |
| How about $200,000 in four years? | |
| 28 | |
| 00:02:12,520 --> 00:02:18,280 | |
| Well that certainly sounds like a significant improvement over $25,000, but let us examine | |
| 29 | |
| 00:02:18,280 --> 00:02:19,640 | |
| it further. | |
| 30 | |
| 00:02:19,640 --> 00:02:25,120 | |
| $200,000 in four years means roughly $50,000 extra per year. | |
| 31 | |
| 00:02:25,120 --> 00:02:31,360 | |
| But this person also took a pay cut, so they lost $125,000 per year in salary. | |
| 32 | |
| 00:02:31,360 --> 00:02:36,840 | |
| While they earned only an extra $50,000 a year out of stock options. | |
| 33 | |
| 00:02:36,840 --> 00:02:40,400 | |
| Now it does not look so attractive. | |
| 34 | |
| 00:02:40,400 --> 00:02:45,240 | |
| Build your own personal scale to make these calculations. | |
| 35 | |
| 00:02:45,240 --> 00:02:49,240 | |
| A good thumb rule to use is as follows. | |
| 36 | |
| 00:02:49,240 --> 00:02:55,440 | |
| For someone at the highest criticality rating A, start with an intended benefit of about | |
| 37 | |
| 00:02:55,440 --> 00:03:00,760 | |
| six to eight times their current market worth in four years. | |
| 38 | |
| 00:03:00,760 --> 00:03:06,240 | |
| We always assume the intended gross benefit for an employee, just like we mostly talk | |
| 39 | |
| 00:03:06,240 --> 00:03:11,360 | |
| about the gross salary and not the salary after tax. | |
| 40 | |
| 00:03:11,360 --> 00:03:18,200 | |
| So in our example, using six to eight times the current worth of $200,000, the intended | |
| 41 | |
| 00:03:18,200 --> 00:03:24,360 | |
| benefit comes to about $1.2 to $1.6 million in four years. | |
| 42 | |
| 00:03:24,360 --> 00:03:29,400 | |
| Considering that they gave up a cash salary of around half a million dollars or more in | |
| 43 | |
| 00:03:29,400 --> 00:03:34,400 | |
| four years, they would still profit from their stock options. | |
| 44 | |
| 00:03:34,400 --> 00:03:41,500 | |
| If you go up to 10 or 12 times, the amount would be $2 to $2.4 million in four years. | |
| 45 | |
| 00:03:41,500 --> 00:03:48,080 | |
| This was for criticality A. You could use the same or a descending multiple for criticality | |
| 46 | |
| 00:03:48,080 --> 00:03:55,600 | |
| ratings B, C, D, and E. So if criticality A is eight X of the annual worth in a four-year | |
| 47 | |
| 00:03:55,600 --> 00:04:04,240 | |
| period, B could be six X, C, four X, D, three X, and E, two X. | |
| 48 | |
| 00:04:04,240 --> 00:04:09,360 | |
| Using a descending multiple essentially means you're using a weighted system where you | |
| 49 | |
| 00:04:09,360 --> 00:04:13,960 | |
| assign higher weights to higher criticality ratings. | |
| 50 | |
| 00:04:13,960 --> 00:04:19,440 | |
| If you were to use the same multiple throughout all the criticality ratings, people would | |
| 51 | |
| 00:04:19,440 --> 00:04:26,760 | |
| still get a different number of stock options because their salary might be different. | |
| 52 | |
| 00:04:26,760 --> 00:04:31,320 | |
| The difference in the grand numbers between two people under this method would be less | |
| 53 | |
| 00:04:31,320 --> 00:04:33,720 | |
| stock. | |
| 54 | |
| 00:04:33,720 --> 00:04:38,720 | |
| Using a higher multiple for higher criticality ratings might be reasonable to do in many | |
| 55 | |
| 00:04:38,720 --> 00:04:44,480 | |
| instances where you believe that the ability to create value goes up with an increase | |
| 56 | |
| 00:04:44,480 --> 00:04:46,760 | |
| in criticality. | |
| 57 | |
| 00:04:46,760 --> 00:04:51,680 | |
| Try both the options, the same multiple for all, and a different multiple for different | |
| 58 | |
| 00:04:51,680 --> 00:04:53,120 | |
| ratings. | |
| 59 | |
| 00:04:53,120 --> 00:04:58,280 | |
| Think about it for some time and then decide what works best for you. | |
| 60 | |
| 00:04:58,280 --> 00:05:04,440 | |
| So to recap, we start with calculating the intended benefit for an employee. | |
| 61 | |
| 00:05:04,440 --> 00:05:09,600 | |
| An amount attractive enough for that individual at that criticality rating. | |
| 62 | |
| 00:05:09,600 --> 00:05:15,000 | |
| But this amount will be earned by them through stock options and not as a cash bonus. | |
| 63 | |
| 00:05:15,000 --> 00:05:20,400 | |
| You need to determine how many stock options you must give them so they can earn this intended | |
| 64 | |
| 00:05:20,400 --> 00:05:25,080 | |
| benefit of $1.6 or $2 million in four years. | |
| 65 | |
| 00:05:25,080 --> 00:05:29,720 | |
| They will earn this amount by selling the shares that they receive after exercising | |
| 66 | |
| 00:05:29,720 --> 00:05:31,000 | |
| the options. | |
| 67 | |
| 00:05:31,000 --> 00:05:38,080 | |
| So you need to understand how much profit one equity share might provide in four years. | |
| 68 | |
| 00:05:38,080 --> 00:05:41,840 | |
| To do that, you need to look at your financial projections. | |