Original Summary

Prior to Microsoft's acquisition of Skype in 2011, Skype dismissed over six dozen senior executives, VPs, CMOs and HR leaders who had worked at the company for years. Despite the immediate eyebrow-raising timing, what really transpired was when Yee Lee, a former employee of HCL who had left his job, released the language from his stock option agreement. The clause contained a provision that allowed Skype and its investor Silver Lake to buy back pre-vested shares at the original grant price, treating redeemed stock as if it had occurred before the sale. It was not a liquidation preference issue, nor advisable to exit. An enormous sum was generated by the sale of Skype. A different mechanism existed: the contract allowed the company to recover equity employees who were believed to have already been repaid, and dismissing workers before the agreement was finalized resulted in this reciprocal. If you've ever signed a stock option agreement without legal representation, Lee's write-up is worth reading. See page three for more details. The emphasis is on scrutinizing the actual option grant agreement, not the cap table. How many of you have read the full option grant agreement and not just skimmed the offer letter? Is this true? Would it be considered inappropriate for you as a founder to include 'credit' clauses in your company's agreements?   submitted by   /u/Patient_Apricot_9783 [link]   [comments]

  • 情报分类：工作与职业机会
  • 分类依据：内容涉及招聘、求职或职业发展
  • 信息来源：Reddit · SaaS
  • 发布时间：2026/9/24 19:12:22