| 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. |
|
|
|
|