The crazy thing to me is: 1) the fact that employees are granted options instead of shares is an artifact of tax law, and 2) the fact that there&#x27;s a 90 day exercise window is also an artifact of tax law. Yet, companies constantly come up with post-hoc justifications of why only giving a 90 day window is fair. There is big resistance to change on this point. Even Ben Horowitz and Sam Altman don&#x27;t think it&#x27;s a clear decision! <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;genius.com&#x2F;B-horowitz-lecture-15-how-to-manage-annotated&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;genius.com&#x2F;B-horowitz-lecture-15-how-to-manage-annota...</a><p>If you were to derive how to think about employee ownership of a company as a form of compensation from first principles, you&#x27;d never come up with options and you&#x27;d never come up with a 90-day exercise window on top of that. Those are both artifacts from tax law yet it&#x27;s become the standard form of compensation!