Choosing between two in-house offers? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I have two competing offers to go in-house. The benefits on vacation/401K match/health insurance are indistinguishable as far as I can tell. Title's the same too. I'm currently corporate c/o 2018.

Offer 1: (Start Up)
Base: 210k
Bonus: 25% annual
Equity: options to purchase shares only
Note: Small company, looking to IPO in the next few years, not profitable yet and their tech is only now starting to generate actual shares, so this thing could still fail or just not generate any returns (most start ups do fail, after all). They tried to sell me on the superior experience of being at a small and growing company.

Offer 2: (Mature Company)
Base: 195k
Bonus: 20% annual
Equity: $30 annual in shares
Note: It's a FAANG, so a sure thing, and those shares are real money.

The actual cash value of the compensation is pretty much the same, which makes sense because I told them both I expected at least 260 all in and, well, they did. I'm concerned that the start up will be a ton of work since it's growing and not a well oiled corporate machine, and of course it could literally fail or generate no returns in the coming years. Plus no one's ever heard of it as far as I can tell, so it's not a huge resume booster for future moves. The mature company is a reliable gig, a resume booster for future in-house roles, and I can't imagine share values will be a problem. I'm also concerned it will also just be a grind like biglaw. I don't need a strict 9-5, but a step down from biglaw is basically why I'm leaving the firm anyway. Anyone else gone through a similar scenario?

[Anonymous User]

Offer 1 sounds like it has the most upside if you can stomach the risk. Not uncommon for people who get in early at a startup to 5x, 10x or multiply their equity even higher in the event of an IPO - and if that's your thing, having experience at a private company pre-IPO will be a resume boost to get hired early at other start ups down the line. But you'll have to get good at picking your horses.

Offer 2 sounds good too and you still get some equity upside, although FAANGs are pretty mature and that means your chance to multiply your equity won't be anywhere near as high, but still a pretty good chance at 2x-ing or 3x-ing your equity comp over a couple of years, given the way FAANGs have performed.

You should also ask whether the bonuses are performance based and if so, whether they intend to pay the full 20% or 25% or somewhere below that (or what's been typical in past years).

Offer 1 might be more work, but IME people at companies are nowhere near as demanding as biglaw, and hopefully you'd be able to shape your role and manage expectations early on.

[Anonymous User]

FAANG all the way. Your resume will be golden and the name recognition will set you up nicely for future gigs.

[Bosque]

Completely unrelated to your conundrum, but shouldn't it be MAAAN now?

[Anonymous User]

Offer 1: (Start Up)
Base: 210k
Bonus: 25% annual
Equity: options to purchase shares only
Note: Small company, looking to IPO in the next few years, not profitable yet and their tech is only now starting to generate actual shares, so this thing could still fail or just not generate any returns (most start ups do fail, after all). They tried to sell me on the superior experience of being at a small and growing company.

What is your position at the start-up? I'm the lone attorney at a start-up, so I am de facto GC. Even if the start-up ultimately fails, being the GC will be a huge thing to put on a resume, may be better than if you were a cog attorney at a FAANG. Even if you aren't GC, if you need to tackle a lot of different issues as part of your job, it's good experience. Culture is super important at a start-up, so you need to make sure you mesh with what they've got going on.

Completely unrelated to your conundrum, but shouldn't it be MAAAN now?

Never understood why Microsoft wasn't part of this acronym. Because if it was, I would try to popularize MANAMA.

[The Lsat Airbender]

Offer 1: (Start Up)
Base: 210k
Bonus: 25% annual
Equity: options to purchase shares only
Note: Small company, looking to IPO in the next few years, not profitable yet and their tech is only now starting to generate actual shares, so this thing could still fail or just not generate any returns (most start ups do fail, after all). They tried to sell me on the superior experience of being at a small and growing company.

What is your position at the start-up? I'm the lone attorney at a start-up, so I am de facto GC. Even if the start-up ultimately fails, being the GC will be a huge thing to put on a resume, may be better than if you were a cog attorney at a FAANG. Even if you aren't GC, if you need to tackle a lot of different issues as part of your job, it's good experience. Culture is super important at a start-up, so you need to make sure you mesh with what they've got going on.

Completely unrelated to your conundrum, but shouldn't it be MAAAN now?

Never understood why Microsoft wasn't part of this acronym. Because if it was, I would try to popularize MANAMA.

A man, a mlan, a manal: MANAMA