Morale among Apple Employees

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
38
0
Seattle, WA
Engineers covet stock options in technical companies. As long as the company stock keeps going up, your options have value and everyone is happy almost regardless of how good or bad the company is. Have the stock stay the same or go down, and options become worthless ("under water"). In Silicon valley this is deadly as one has an option to work for 50 other companies in 5 mile radius. Good video on Apple's situation in this regard:

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/is-a...es-r1zdjm4dSZe3Qm~7ErLEog.html?cmpid=msnmoney
 

JackD201

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
12,319
1,429
1,820
Manila, Philippines
It's not just engineers. I remember when my wife worked for Citigroup and Citi tanked. Her regret was never selling her shares. People must realize that those options are meant to be monetized. Stocks aren't gold bullion and even gold bullion isn't gold bullion. Cash however is cash.
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
Do engineers have really short memories?

Tim
 

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
38
0
Seattle, WA
Do engineers have really short memories?

Tim
What do you mean? The old stock price? If so, they have no memories. You can walk next door to a start-up who promises you that they will do an IPO or sell the company to Google, Cisco or Facebook and make you a million dollars for a year's worth of work. Or you could sit around hoping your company's stock price goes back up. If the first start-up doesn't work, you do another. And another. If you are a big company in bay area and your stock is not doubling every year, you are in dire shape. You will lose key employees to start-ups left and right. My rule when I managed engineering teams there was that you were either growing like mad or you were dead. There was no middle road of sitting there stationary like Apple is today.

If you want to leave, this is the time to leave. You come from a high at Apple. Sit there for another year and people wonder what is wrong with you and maybe you are not so good.

I worked for Sony and recruited and motivated engineers against such currents. It is hard. I did it. But was hard. Apple had an ace that they no longer have: Jobs. If a key engineer wanted to leave, you have Jobs have a chat with him and turn him around. He would go home and say to his family that Jobs begged him to stay. Nothing like that exists that way.

Mind you, not everyone would leave. People with families want stability and with high mortgage payments in bay area, you don't want to be without a paycheck. Your risk are the single engineers which there are a ton of in bay area (silicon valley).

It is an incredible little world out there. It has its own culture so different than anything that exist elsewhere.
 

rrr

New Member
May 17, 2010
127
0
0
What do you mean? The old stock price? If so, they have no memories. You can walk next door to a start-up who promises you that they will do an IPO or sell the company to Google, Cisco or Facebook and make you a million dollars for a year's worth of work. Or you could sit around hoping your company's stock price goes back up. If the first start-up doesn't work, you do another. And another. If you are a big company in bay area and your stock is not doubling every year, you are in dire shape. You will lose key employees to start-ups left and right. My rule when I managed engineering teams there was that you were either growing like mad or you were dead. There was no middle road of sitting there stationary like Apple is today.

If you want to leave, this is the time to leave. You come from a high at Apple. Sit there for another year and people wonder what is wrong with you and maybe you are not so good.

I worked for Sony and recruited and motivated engineers against such currents. It is hard. I did it. But was hard. Apple had an ace that they no longer have: Jobs. If a key engineer wanted to leave, you have Jobs have a chat with him and turn him around. He would go home and say to his family that Jobs begged him to stay. Nothing like that exists that way.

Mind you, not everyone would leave. People with families want stability and with high mortgage payments in bay area, you don't want to be without a paycheck. Your risk are the single engineers which there are a ton of in bay area (silicon valley).

It is an incredible little world out there. It has its own culture so different than anything that exist elsewhere.


The financial markets are uncertain and whenever anything significant happens that is adverse, the markets collapse. There are some major potential negative events in this country's financial future and it won't take many of them to kill the markets in which case the IPO market will decline faster and deeper than other markets. This situation is obvious and it is very much in the mind of any Engineers considering a change from Apple to some new company with a great idea and promises of an eventual IPO.

Engineers at Apple are in a unique position to evaluate the company's future because they know what they are working on, they have some understanding of future development efforts and the company has a great history of producing things that work and that people want. Valley engineers are also accustomed to the wild IPO stories based on the senseless financial projections of companies with great ideas and they know that just a good idea coupled with extravagant promises isn't enough any more.

You can also keep in mind that the existing otm options are unlikely to be the only options ever awarded to Apple employees. Many employees will welcome the low market prices of stock as an opportunity to receive fresh options at lower exercise prices. Goodness knows, Apple certainly has the financial ability/equity to award a lot more options whenever they wish.

I think you will find that there are many Apple employees who view the country's financial future with uncertainty, view the start ups and promises of IPOs with skepticism and do not feel this is the time to leave to join a new company that may or may not have a successful IPO.
 

rrr

New Member
May 17, 2010
127
0
0
Have the stock stay the same or go down, and options become worthless ("under water").

Not entirely true. Options have value even if the option exercise price is greater than the stock price; they have value based on the time during which they may be exercised. An employee may not be able to sell his out of the money option or otherwise monetize it but there is still value because the market goes up as well as down and there is value to his ability to exercise that option at a future time.

Check out the prices for the exchange traded out of the money AAPL options. There are some big numbers there and those options may or may not expire worthless whereas the employees options may have a distant expiration or be without expiration providing greater value as well as a reason not to leave the company and forfeit the options.
 

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
38
0
Seattle, WA
Not entirely true. Options have value even if the option exercise price is greater than the stock price; they have value based on the time during which they may be exercised. An employee may not be able to sell his out of the money option or otherwise monetize it but there is still value because the market goes up as well as down and there is value to his ability to exercise that option at a future time.
I am confused about your point. You seem to know that employee options do not have open market value when under water. They are worthless as such when stock price goes lower than strike price and that is it. So not sure why it matters that there is an open market for under water options.

Check out the prices for the exchange traded out of the money AAPL options. There are some big numbers there and those options may or may not expire worthless whereas the employees options may have a distant expiration or be without expiration providing greater value as well as a reason not to leave the company and forfeit the options.
In my experience what the open market assess with respect to under water options is of no impact on employee morale. If the option price is $20 and current stock price is $15, every employee writes off the value as zero which is correct as of that time. They could leave, get options at a company whose stock is growing and immediately be in a better position. Of course it is a gamble that the new company will keep growing but in the minds of the employee, that is a sure thing vs waiting for some magic to happen for the current company.

When I joined Microsoft, stock doubled in price once or twice. Then we lost the DOJ case and price dropped by factor of two. Then tried to buy Yahoo or some such thing and that caused another 2:1 drop. The stock then sat there for 5-7 years. The dynamics it created was really tough. We were helped by the fact that employees did not have many options in Seattle. In Bay area, that would have been catastrophic. I left Microsoft with hundreds of thousands of options that were under water. This, despite cashing out a bunch in a limited program Microsoft offered to swap worthless options for a few cents each. And I was there 11 years. Waiting did not change the dynamics much. This, despite working for a company that printed billions of dollars in currency every year and still does.

Problem with handing out stock options for public companies to employees is that you turn all of them into gamblers in the stock market. Most people do not have the stomach to handle the ups and downs of the market. But you force them all to play it since every engineer gets options. For this reason, Microsoft got rid of the options a few years ago and switched to straight stock grants. They always have value but you lose the large upside potential that options had. In balance, it made for happier employee pool than when we had options even though dreams of striking it rich quick, went out the window.
 

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
38
0
Seattle, WA
The financial markets are uncertain and whenever anything significant happens that is adverse, the markets collapse. There are some major potential negative events in this country's financial future and it won't take many of them to kill the markets in which case the IPO market will decline faster and deeper than other markets. This situation is obvious and it is very much in the mind of any Engineers considering a change from Apple to some new company with a great idea and promises of an eventual IPO.
I mentioned IPO for completeness. The IPO was the keyword for the last two decades. Now the name of the game is being acquired by a big company. And that story is easier told and frankly, pretty easy to make happen relative to doing IPO. Look at the huge amounts of money thrown at the start-ups being acquired left and right by these larger companies.

Engineers at Apple are in a unique position to evaluate the company's future because they know what they are working on, they have some understanding of future development efforts and the company has a great history of producing things that work and that people want.
That amounts to absolutely nothing. No Apple employee sans the leadership group can predict the stock price in the slightest. I once took a Corporate VP job at a company that had just gone public a few months back. I took over from the founder and showed up to work with option prices of say, $24. Two weeks later an analyst says one of our larger customers is going to have trouble and that company's stock tanks and took us down with it. Next thing I know, our stock price is down to $16. Here I am at a new job and am facing options that are $8 under water! The CEO tells me to not worry. That the IPO generated enough cash that if the company vanished, the stock price would still be $12. So $16 is a bargain. Yeh, right. Stock proceeds to head down to $13. Then a corporate raider showed up to try to buy the company, shut it down and take the cash. So we hurry up and create a "poison pill" to avoid that. I left the company a year and half later and stock price was just $13 still. I had zero value for my options and hard work there while the founders bought $100K luxury cars and enjoyed their IPO.

Here I am as a director and officer of the above company and had no ability or knowledge to impact stock price. I knew everything, and thought it all pointed to better things but didn't happen. There is no way ordinary Apple engineers would have any remote idea or influence over stock price of a company like that. Indeed, that is the reason to leave a big company: in a start-up, you can easily influence and know what is going on in your company. Big fish in the small pond kind of thing.

Valley engineers are also accustomed to the wild IPO stories based on the senseless financial projections of companies with great ideas and they know that just a good idea coupled with extravagant promises isn't enough any more.
For every story of a start-up that went nowhere, there are 10 that did. It is all around you. With hundreds of companies at any one time going after this pot of gold, the success stories are there and huge motivator to jump ship. Yes, the one you choose might fail but so what? You try and try again and the third one would work. For me, the first start-up did it as we sold it to Microsoft. :)

You can also keep in mind that the existing otm options are unlikely to be the only options ever awarded to Apple employees. Many employees will welcome the low market prices of stock as an opportunity to receive fresh options at lower exercise prices. Goodness knows, Apple certainly has the financial ability/equity to award a lot more options whenever they wish.
That is the story that works for a bit: we went through that at Microsoft. You hang your hat on those "cheap options." A year later is the time of reckoning. If the stock has not gone up, that hope and prayer goes out the window. I just looked and in the last 12 months, Apple stock has gone *down* 32%. So all the options with that promise a year ago are now in a hole. Folks accept the story once, but not the second time.

I think you will find that there are many Apple employees who view the country's financial future with uncertainty, view the start ups and promises of IPOs with skepticism and do not feel this is the time to leave to join a new company that may or may not have a successful IPO.
As I said, if you are married, with huge mortgage, you may think that way. For majority of silicon valley engineers, that is not at all how they view the world. Working for a start-up is where it is at. They work for a public company as long as it is growing like mad. Anything other than that it means it is yesterday's news. There is a reason Google hires four star chefs to feed engineers free gourmet food. They have to do everything in their power to compete with appeal of start-ups.
 

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
38
0
Seattle, WA
Just back-date them all at a lower price like Steve did ;-)
I have worked for companies that did that. Unfortunately the price kept going down so it created no value for employees (your vesting resets to 4 years again on repricing so you can't sell quick). And pissed off the investors as they hate to see employees come out OK when the stock price goes down, and them not.
 

jazdoc

Member Sponsor
Aug 7, 2010
3,328
737
1,700
Bellevue
This thread wonderfully illustrates how the idea behind stock options (tying employees compensation to company success) is perverted in actual practice.

For too long companies colluded with employees, using stock options to avoid accounting for the value of employee compensation in the form of stock options on their income statements. In practice, stock options represent a sale of part interest of the company from the existing shareholders to the company's employees. Using legitimate accounting practice, the cost of options to the other owners of the company (shareholders) was buried on the balance sheet and cash flow statement. Worst of all, options are a heads I win, tails you lose proposition for employees because the value of an option is never negative, i.e. employees only participate in the upside unlike shareholders who face downside risk.

If you want to link employee compensation to the company's success, then do so purposefully by utilizing actual company metrics that reflect the change in value of the entity (sales and income growth, ROI, ROE, etc.). This is better than using options which create a corporate lottery atmosphere subject to the capriciousness of timing the stock market (over which employees have not control). Better yet, tie an individual employee's compensation to the segment of the business that they have control over. If the Explorer division of Microsoft is doing gangbusters, why should someone who contributed to underperformance in another division (i.e. Xbox) benefit?

As compensation is an employee expense, it is properly accounted for under employee costs on the income statement and not buried on the balance sheet and cash flow statements.

End of rant
 

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
38
0
Seattle, WA
It is a broken system. BTW, on accounting for it, Microsoft adopted the policy on that from what I recall, Apple was one of the companies that was refusing to show it on their income statement. Not sure if they have changed. Microsoft also switched to stock grants as I mentioned before.

BTW, shared incentive does not work either. My last position took me to the Xbox division but what I managed had little to do with them. As luck would have it, Xbox did poorly that year and we all lost a ton of our compensation. It was a huge demotivator and made everyone else who was in the division hate the Xbox guys. Having your compensation tied to that of hundreds and thousands of other people doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

I am a fan of completely informal systems. Give the tools to the (senior) managers to do whatever they need to do to make their top performers happy. Cash, stock options, raises, etc. This is one of the downfalls of Microsoft in the last few years. Everything is done based on bell shape curves, strict formulas and such which is very damaging to employee (and manager) morale. I can't think of a worse system.
 

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
38
0
Seattle, WA
That was coming from a mile away. There was no more open and shut case than this one. Amazon was selling ebooks below cost and Apple came in with iPad, forced the model to "agency" and enabling publishers to set prices rather than the distributor. That raised the ebook prices and we all lost in the equation. The publishers all settled but Apple held out and here they are. The settlement would have been far more harmless than the reputation of losing a case on price fixing. Maybe they have a legal challenge I don't understand. But there was not a person in the industry who did not know what they did here. It is just taken the court a few years to say the same thing. If they were smart they would settle this. Bad for them is that the terms will be more onerous now than if they had not lost the verdict.
 

mep

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
9,481
17
0
While we are talking about the happiness of Apple employees, how about mentioning the happiness or lack thereof of the employees who actually build Apple products? I'm talking about Foxconn in China where they have to put catch nets outside the windows of the dormitories in order to prevent employees from jumping out of the windows and committing suicide because they are so happy. Foxconn makes their employees sign a letter stating that they promise not to commit suicide and if they do, Foxconn will not pay their families any money because they took their life. Never mind stock options, they can't even get a simple raise.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2398713,00.asp
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing