The more a founder trumpets the headline number that was chosen to be leaked about an acquisition, the less he actually made off of it thanks to dilution, liquidation preferences, earnouts, revesting, and taxes.
The more a founder trumpets the headline number that was chosen to be leaked about an acquisition, the less he actually made off of it thanks to dilution, liquidation preferences, earnouts, revesting, and taxes.
Some users stress that acquisition details like dilution and taxes mean founders take home far less than headlines suggest, while others dismiss those who overlook these factors as uninformed.
It's funny how ball un-knowers equate the exit size (assuming it's even true) to founder outcome.
Oh, let me sit you down and explain how dilution and retention incentives work....
The more a founder trumpets the headline number that was chosen to be leaked about an acquisition, the less he actually made off of it thanks to dilution, liquidation preferences, earnouts, revesting, and taxes.

@antoniogm Details matter 💯

@antoniogm Liq prefs blew my mind when I first read about it in Venture Deals. Explains why many "repeat founders with multiple exits" are still relatively poor.

@antoniogm The vanity metric hides the actual check.
The more a founder trumpets the headline number that was chosen to be leaked about an acquisition, the less he actually made off of it thanks to dilution, liquidation preferences, earnouts, revesting, and taxes.