Financial Planning
Compare Employee Liquidity Offers on One Consistent Basis
Normalize employee liquidity offers by share quantity, fees, payment timing and remaining holdings.
What you will learn
- Calculate gross and fee-adjusted proceeds using supplied terms.
- Compare offers on a common quantity as well as their maximums.
- Keep timing, conditions and retained shares visible.
Compare employee liquidity offers on a consistent basis before comparing their headlines. A higher price can cover fewer shares; a larger maximum payment can leave you with fewer shares. Put quantity, fees, conditions and timing beside the price, then keep personal suitability questions separate.
Start with documented terms, not a promotional number
Investor.gov’s tender-offer definition makes terms and conditions central to the offer. The SEC’s private-secondary overview also highlights restrictions surrounding private resales. The arithmetic below assumes the supplied quantities are eligible and accepted solely to practice comparison; it does not determine anyone’s eligibility.
Keep the same share class and rights in both columns. Record whether a fee is fixed or quantity-dependent, and do not call a pre-tax figure “take-home pay.”
Compare the maximum supplied quantities
Fictional example: a holder has 8,000 shares of one class. Offer A pays $12 per share, accepts up to 25% of that holding and charges a fixed $200 fee. Offer B pays $13, accepts up to 1,500 shares and has no stated fee. Assume no other costs or deductions for this exercise.
Fictional maximum-quantity comparison
| Measure | Offer A | Offer B |
|---|---|---|
| Supplied maximum quantity | 2,000 shares | 1,500 shares |
| Price per share | $12 | $13 |
| Gross proceeds | $24,000 | $19,500 |
| Fixed fee | $200 | $0 |
| Fee-adjusted proceeds, before tax | $23,800 | $19,500 |
| Shares retained | 6,000 | 6,500 |
Offer A has the larger maximum payment because it covers 500 more shares. That is not evidence it has the better price or is the right choice.
Normalize the comparison to a common quantity
At 1,500 shares each, A produces $18,000 gross and $17,800 after its fixed fee. B produces $19,500 on the same basis. This exposes the unit-price difference that the maximum-payment comparison concealed.
If an offer does not permit the common quantity, do not manufacture a directly executable comparison. Label the normalization as analytical only and preserve the actual acceptance rules.
Add the terms arithmetic cannot settle
- Payment: When is money actually expected, and what can delay it?
- Acceptance: Are caps, proration, minimum quantities or priorities involved?
- Restrictions: What approvals and transfer requirements remain?
- Fees: Which costs are known, variable or unavailable?
- Retained holding: How many shares remain, and what rights do they carry?
- Review: Which personal legal, tax or financial questions require separate advice?
Unknown costs are not zero. If a fee has not been disclosed, keep it visibly unknown and do not rank net proceeds as if the figure were complete.
Exercise: change the price, not the quantity
For a new comparison scenario, A pays $13.50 per share and keeps its $200 fixed fee. Compare both offers at 1,500 shares; B stays at $13 without a fee.
Answer: A produces $20,250 gross and $20,050 after the fee. B remains $19,500. A’s fee-adjusted amount is $550 higher on this defined basis. This calculation still does not resolve timing, conditions, tax or suitability.
Bring a clean comparison to the right conversation
The growth-equity guide explains why company financing and shareholder liquidity can coexist without being the same transaction. This worksheet instead helps a holder compare supplied offers, not choose a financing provider.
Organize the offer documents and open questions in Finta Documents. Preserve the exact source and version for each term so a reviewer can check the comparison without reverse-engineering the headline.
General education with fictional examples, not individualized legal, tax, valuation or investment advice. Have the appropriate professional review decisions affecting actual awards or transactions.