Flipkart executives write to Walmart board over seek fair treatment

Flipkart’s long-running employee stock option uncertainty has escalated after a group of former senior executives directly approached Walmart’s board, seeking a liquidity opportunity for vested ESOPs they received during their years at the e-commerce company. The former executives argue that leaving Flipkart should not automatically prevent them from monetising equity that was earned as part of their compensation.

The dispute comes at a sensitive time for Flipkart. The company’s long-awaited IPO has no confirmed timeline, while current employees have received limited ESOP liquidity through recent buyback programmes. According to Moneycontrol, more than 30,000 current and former employees collectively stand to receive around $4 billion from ESOP buybacks that have yet to be facilitated, with roughly half of that amount associated with former employees. Walmart has said it will examine the former employees’ concerns and continues to describe an IPO as part of Flipkart’s strategic roadmap.

Key takeaways

• At least eight former Flipkart CXOs and senior executives have approached Walmart’s board over vested ESOPs.
• The former executives are seeking a complete exit opportunity for eligible former employees holding vested equity.
• They received many of their options between 2008 and 2016 and say some holdings have remained locked up for more than a decade.
• Flipkart completed a second ESOP liquidity event for eligible current employees in 2026, allowing them to liquidate up to 5% of specified vested options at ₹713.4 per option.
• Walmart has not announced a full buyback for former employees.
• Flipkart’s IPO remains part of Walmart’s strategic roadmap, but the company has provided no listing date.
• The dispute highlights a broader problem for employees of large private startups: paper wealth can remain difficult to convert into cash when IPOs or secondary liquidity events are delayed.

Former Flipkart executives ask Walmart for a full exit opportunity

The immediate trigger for the latest development is an October 1 letter sent to Walmart’s board. Moneycontrol reported that at least eight former Flipkart CXOs and senior executives signed the communication, while The Economic Times reported that the letter was addressed to Walmart chairman Gregory B. Penner, other board members and Flipkart Group CEO Kalyan Krishnamurthy.

The signatories include former Myntra CEO Mukesh Bansal, former Flipkart chief business officer Ankit Nagori, former CTOs Amod Malviya and Ravi Garikipati, former chief people officer Mekin Maheshwari and former vice president Anuj Chowdhary, among others.

The central argument is straightforward: these executives say their ESOPs were not speculative investments they purchased after leaving Flipkart. They were part of their compensation for helping build the company during its formative years.

The executives received their options largely between 2008 and 2016. Some have continued holding their vested interests for more than 10 years.

They are therefore asking Walmart to extend a liquidity opportunity to eligible former employees rather than limiting such opportunities to people who remain on Flipkart’s payroll.

Why the former employees say the situation is unfair

The former executives are not challenging Flipkart’s previous ESOP buybacks. Instead, they are questioning why former employees should be excluded from a future liquidity programme simply because they no longer work for the company.

Their position becomes particularly important because Flipkart remains privately held. Without an IPO or a company-sponsored secondary transaction, holders of private-company equity generally have fewer avenues to turn their holdings into cash.

The executives also point to the contrast between different groups of stakeholders.

Early investors and founders have already had opportunities to realise value from Flipkart. Current employees have also received several liquidity opportunities. Former employees who continue to hold vested equity, they argue, should not be permanently left outside those mechanisms.

The request is therefore less about demanding a particular valuation and more about gaining access to a liquidity event.

Flipkart has already conducted multiple ESOP liquidity programmes

The dispute cannot be understood without looking at Flipkart’s history of employee liquidity.

Flipkart has used ESOP buybacks over several years to allow employees to monetise part of their equity without waiting for an IPO. One of the biggest programmes came in 2023 following the separation of PhonePe, when Flipkart announced an ESOP payout of about $700 million that benefited roughly 19,000 current and former employees.

More recently, Flipkart operated a two-part programme worth about $50 million.

In July 2026, the company announced its second discretionary liquidity event under that programme. Eligible active employees as of July 15 were allowed to liquidate up to 5% of outstanding stock options that had vested between July 16, 2023, and July 15, 2026.

The liquidity price was fixed at ₹713.4 per option, with payments scheduled for August.

That programme was specifically aimed at eligible current employees. It is this distinction that has become a major point of contention for former executives.

Current employees may receive another opportunity

The issue has become more complicated because Flipkart is reportedly considering another employee liquidity programme.

Mint reported earlier in October that management had discussed a potential programme early next year that could allow eligible current employees to sell 20–25% of their vested holdings. The proposal had not been finalised, and the precise investors or funding mechanism had not been established.

This possibility has intensified the concern among former employees.

If current employees receive another opportunity to monetise their holdings while former employees with vested equity remain excluded, the gap between the two groups could become more pronounced.

It is important, however, to distinguish between a reported proposal and an approved programme. The potential 20–25% window has not been confirmed as a completed transaction.

The IPO is the missing liquidity event

The deeper problem is Flipkart’s uncertain path to the public markets.

An IPO would provide a broad mechanism for employees and other shareholders to realise value from their holdings. But Flipkart has repeatedly pushed back expectations around a listing.

In July, Group CEO Kalyan Krishnamurthy told The Economic Times that the company did not have a timeline for going public and had never had a firm timeline.

Walmart has maintained that an IPO remains part of Flipkart’s strategic roadmap but has also said the company will move forward when the timing is right.

That distinction is crucial.

Flipkart is not abandoning the IPO. At the same time, there is currently no confirmed date that employees can use to plan around.

For someone who has held vested ESOPs for 10 or 15 years, another indefinite delay can be economically significant.

Why ESOP liquidity matters to startup employees

Employee stock options are designed to align employees with the long-term value of a company.

An employee may accept a lower cash salary than they could receive elsewhere because a portion of compensation comes in the form of equity. If the company grows significantly and eventually goes public or conducts a buyback, that equity can become substantial wealth.

The problem arises when the company remains private for a long period.

A vested option can have a high theoretical value but limited practical liquidity.

For example:

Situation	Employee outcome
IPO happens	Employee may eventually sell shares in public markets, subject to applicable restrictions
Company buyback	Employee receives cash for eligible equity
Secondary sale	Employee may sell to an approved investor or buyer
No liquidity event	Equity may remain difficult or impossible to monetise
Company valuation rises	Paper wealth can increase without immediate cash value

This is why IPO delays are not merely corporate-finance issues for employees. They can directly affect compensation, retention and career decisions.

The dispute comes amid senior-level departures

The ESOP issue is also emerging alongside a period of leadership churn at Flipkart.

The Economic Times reported several senior departures in recent months, including executives from finance, strategy, talent, supply chain and other functions. Myntra CEO Nandita Sinha also left after more than a decade with the group and subsequently moved to Swiggy Instamart.

Moneycontrol separately reported that at least 10 vice president and senior vice president-level executives had exited in recent months.

It would be too strong to attribute every departure to ESOP uncertainty. Executives leave large companies for many reasons, including compensation, career opportunities, organisational changes and strategic priorities.

However, multiple reports indicate that uncertainty around employee wealth and the IPO has become one factor affecting morale.

That creates a potential feedback loop for Flipkart.

IPO uncertainty → delayed liquidity → employee frustration → retention pressure → senior departures → greater pressure on management

This is an analytical relationship rather than a confirmed causal chain, but it explains why ESOP policy has become strategically important for Flipkart.

Walmart’s response leaves the door open

Walmart has not rejected the former executives’ request.

A Walmart spokesperson told The Economic Times that the company appreciates the perspectives of current and former employees, takes such matters seriously and will examine the issues raised.

Walmart also reiterated that an IPO remains an active part of Flipkart’s strategic roadmap and that the company will move toward public markets when the timing is appropriate.

That response is significant because it avoids committing to a buyback while acknowledging the underlying concern.

There is currently no public confirmation that Walmart has agreed to purchase all vested ESOPs held by eligible former employees.

The amount that such a transaction would require is also unclear.

The $4 billion figure reported by Moneycontrol represents the estimated aggregate value that more than 30,000 current and former employees could collectively receive from ESOP buybacks, according to sources. It should not be interpreted as a confirmed $4 billion cash liability that Walmart must immediately fund.

Flipkart’s valuation makes the question even more important

Flipkart was valued at approximately $38.2 billion during the July 2026 employee buyback programme, according to reports.

That valuation was about 6% higher than the $36 billion valuation at which Flipkart last raised private capital in May 2024.

Some reports have indicated that Walmart has been seeking a valuation of around $50 billion for Flipkart ahead of a potential public listing. However, that figure is a reported target rather than a completed financing or public-market valuation.

For employees, valuation alone does not solve the liquidity problem.

An employee may hold equity that appears highly valuable on paper, but if there is no buyer, buyback or public listing, the value cannot necessarily be converted into cash.

This distinction between valuation and liquidity is at the heart of the current dispute.

Flipkart’s profitability strategy is also affecting the IPO timeline

The IPO uncertainty is not happening in isolation.

Moneycontrol has previously reported that Walmart asked Flipkart to prioritise profitability and achieve EBITDA break-even before pursuing a major external fundraise or IPO.

That suggests Walmart is balancing two objectives.

The first is getting Flipkart ready for public markets. The second is ensuring that the business is financially stronger before exposing it to public-market scrutiny.

Flipkart Internet, the marketplace arm, reported a consolidated net loss of ₹1,494.2 crore in FY25, although the loss narrowed 36.7% year over year. Total income increased 14% to ₹20,807.4 crore, according to figures cited by The Economic Times.

The broader Flipkart India business reported operating revenue of ₹82,787.3 crore in FY25, while its net loss widened to ₹5,189 crore, according to data cited by Mint from MCA filings.

The different figures relate to different entities within the Flipkart group and should not be treated as interchangeable.

The strategic challenge is therefore clear: Flipkart needs to demonstrate growth while moving toward stronger profitability, particularly as it competes aggressively in e-commerce, logistics and quick commerce.

What happens next?

The most immediate question is whether Walmart will extend a liquidity programme to eligible former employees.

There are several possible outcomes.

Scenario 1: Walmart agrees to a former-employee buyback

This would directly address the former executives’ request and could reduce the immediate pressure around the ESOP issue.

It could also establish a precedent for former employees who continue to hold vested equity.

Scenario 2: Walmart offers a limited liquidity programme

Rather than buying 100% of eligible former employees’ holdings, Walmart could create a partial liquidity window similar to programmes offered to current employees.

Such an approach could reduce the cash requirement while still providing some relief.

Scenario 3: Employees remain dependent on the IPO

Walmart could maintain its current position that the IPO remains the primary long-term liquidity route.

That would leave former employees waiting for greater clarity on the public listing.

For employees who have already held their equity for a decade or more, this could remain unsatisfactory.

The Bigger Picture

Flipkart’s ESOP dispute illustrates a broader transition in India’s startup ecosystem.

During the first wave of Indian internet companies, employees often accepted equity because the promise was that rapid growth would eventually create substantial wealth. As companies have matured, however, employees increasingly expect structured liquidity programmes rather than having all of their financial upside depend on an eventual IPO.

For Flipkart, the challenge is especially visible because the company is one of India’s largest privately held technology businesses and is owned by Walmart, one of the world’s largest retailers.

The company has already demonstrated that it can create substantial employee liquidity through buybacks. The current controversy is about who should qualify for those opportunities.

That makes the dispute bigger than a disagreement between a few former executives and Walmart. It raises a fundamental question about how long-term startup compensation should work when employees leave before a company reaches the public markets.

Looking Ahead

Walmart’s next decision will determine whether the current ESOP dispute remains a limited former-employee grievance or develops into a broader test of Flipkart’s employee-liquidity policy. A full or partial buyback could ease pressure, while continued exclusion of former employees would keep the IPO timeline central to the debate.

For Flipkart, the ultimate solution will need to balance cash conservation, profitability goals, employee retention and shareholder expectations. Until the company provides a clearer path to liquidity, the value of thousands of employees’ vested equity will remain closely tied to a public listing whose timing is still uncertain.