morning all,
just to give a little more on the options for services thing - at least IMO.
I have often seen comment on these option deals and why we don't pay cash as we have enough.
Well, if it were me - I would prefer to pay cash for some services and I would prefer to pay options for other services - and, I wouldn't be too fussed about how cheap the options were either.
One eg. -
If I were paying for say some administrative consultancy ------- then, if it were me - I would pay in cash.
Why? - because they do the service now (ie. in the near future) - and, once that service is done - it is done - that's the end. Of course if it goes well, you have a great relationship and if you need it in the future - then, it is there again.
However, if I was to have a corporate adviser like Eddie - who, I knew was going to be involved in the sale of my business in a couple (few) years - and, who was constantly in touch with people of interest in his daily work --------------- then, cash would be the last thing I would want to pay --------------- I would far far far rather him have a slice of the company - in the form of options (shares) - so that - A. he had a constant and sizable interest in the business and the company - which, would more than likely mean that he wouldn't work against it at any stage -- and, B. that when sale time came - and, particulaly if he was a key player - then, he would play his guts out to do the best deal for HIMSELF --
there is no better driver than self interest.
that's my thoughts on this lovely monday morning
Pinto
PS - I am in 2 minds about paying lobbyists either cash nor options - there are arguments for both.
Pay em cash - done and dusted.
Pay em in options - well, it might help if they are engaged by some other business in future who wants to lobby 'against' our best interests ----------------- I doubt if this would happen if you get the timing right ------------- but, it does bear thinking about.
