6 ms·

Their comp is largely stock, not cash. Eliminating them won't move the needle much on net loss.

• adam_arthur 2y ago
  Stock issuance deducts from GAAP earnings. So yes, it sounds like they would be profitable excluding this issuance. Imagine you own 1% of a business that nets $100/year in cashflow, so you're entitled to $1/year. But they give the employees of that business 2% (of total count) additional shares per year (and not you). Are you making or losing money? Cash flow positive, negative earnings... loss of your equity exceeds your cashflow.
  • s1artibartfast 2y ago
    That's not how it works for this comp. It is the max total stock comp for a 10 years employment if every milestone is hit and reddit market cap goes up 300%.
    • adam_arthur 2y ago
      My example was to refute the parent poster who implied, in a seemingly general sense, that stock issuance doesn't impact earnings, which is false. As to the exact timing of the accounting treatment in this case, I'm not privy to that. The statement above was that the CEO was paid ~$193m in stock, which implies it was issued in that fiscal year. Maybe it was in this case, maybe it wasn't, but that doesn't change the underlying point. Stock grants absolutely do adversely impact GAAP profitability. A company will dilute existing holders to issue RSUs or otherwise.
      • noodle 2y ago
        > My example was to refute the parent poster who implied, in a seemingly general sense, that stock issuance doesn't impact earnings, which is false. I was talking specifically about their comp, not stock in general. Which is why I specifically said "their comp" and not more general language.