Re:Letter from Benchmark to Uber Employees [pdf]
by prostoalex on Monday August 14, 2017 @03:28PM
(#15011917)
Are Benchmark's interests not aligned with employees' interests in this case? They would have preferred stock, so it seems like there's plenty of scenarios where they extract benefit, but common stockholders don't, there's one scenario - perfect execution - where common stockholders benefit while Benchmark benefits enormously, but there are zero scenarios where common stockholders do well, but Benchmark doesn't.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Letter from Benchmark to Uber Employees [pdf]
by mark_element on Monday August 14, 2017 @03:33PM
(#15011989)
Benchmark here has quite different time pressure than potential common stock holders. They need to get liquid.
Re:Letter from Benchmark to Uber Employees [pdf]
by JumpCrisscross on Monday August 14, 2017 @03:40PM
(#15012060)
> They need to get liquid
Benchmark or Uber's employees who hold illiquid common stock?
Re:Letter from Benchmark to Uber Employees [pdf]
by sah2ed on Monday August 14, 2017 @04:05PM
(#15012329)
Benchmark.
At least that's according to this throwaway but highly upvoted comment [0] from some days ago.
Re:Letter from Benchmark to Uber Employees [pdf]
by prostoalex on Monday August 14, 2017 @04:44PM
(#15012687)
The urgency is never quite explained. If Benchmark needs to wind down a fund, they can just distribute shares directly to LPs.
Re:Letter from Benchmark to Uber Employees [pdf]
by prostoalex on Monday August 14, 2017 @04:44PM
(#15012690)
Why?