I would hesitate to invest in either of these companies they each have a CEO that isn't fully focused on only the company.
How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square
61–70 of 74 posts
Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square
#62I typically work 14-20 hours a day, as a DevOps. Sounds crazy, yeah. This is an illness. I am depressed, and also bored. I am compulsive to working and sitting in front of a computer. And finally, I am super micro-manage. I like things to be done in my way. Now, I can't get up early in the morning because the lack of sleep. I don't understand how he can be on time every day and manage to work 18 hours a day. This guy…
Cocaine
Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Plenty of executives work long hours. In fact I imagine most do. I can't find it, but I remember reading where Scott McNealy talked about his dad working long hours as an executive at GM. Elon Musk has 5 kids, as another example.
Except Elon only gets the kids for only half the time (shares custody with his ex-wife) and has a current wife and nannies taking care of the kids when he has them. He mentioned in videos that he doesn't get to spend that much time with his kids. Just because it's possible for executives to work long hours, it doesn't mean it's healthy for their family life to.
Why does one have 5 kids if there's little intention* to spend time with them? Surely he's bright enough to grok birth control?
*I'm not a believer in "doesn't get", rather it's "doesn't want".
Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't downvoting such an opinion enough? Do we pretend that banning will pacify people that want to stir trouble?
Empirically, no, it's nowhere near enough. Also, sometimes such comments get upvoted.
For evidence look no further than any popular subreddit on reddit.
Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except Elon only gets the kids for only half the time (shares custody with his ex-wife) and has a current wife and nannies taking care of the kids when he has them. He mentioned in videos that he doesn't get to spend that much time with his kids. Just because it's possible for executives to work long hours, it doesn't mean it's healthy for their family life to.
Why does one have 5 kids if there's little intention* to spend time with them? Surely he's bright enough to grok birth control? *I'm not a believer in "doesn't get", rather it's "doesn't want".
Maybe he was more interested in spending time with their mothers than with the kids... Very few parents prioritize their kids before themselves even if many feel that is what they one is supposed to do.
Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
As of 2013, the WSJ had a print circulation of 2.4 million, and 900,000 digital subscribers. Do you seriously think all of those people are CEOs and staff? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wall_Street_Journal
Google's results for "how many companies are there in the US" bring up a bunch of credible-looking hits putting the number in the multiples of millions. Put another way, 2.4 million + 900,000 is a bit over one percent of the US population. I've heard the phrase "one percent" before...
I'm not sure what your point is. It's clear that WSJ has a readership in the millions, even if you dispute the precise circulation numbers. And that's what my response to the parent was about. It won't do to suggest that only CEOs and their staff read it.
Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
As of 2013, the WSJ had a print circulation of 2.4 million, and 900,000 digital subscribers. Do you seriously think all of those people are CEOs and staff? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wall_Street_Journal
CEOs, their staff, and their idolators.
Where "idolators" = millions of people independent of CEOs and their staff.
Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
They really aren't. Or at least if they are it's a terrifying commentary on tech companies because neither of them have ever actually made money.
in terms of returns for investors/founders/early employees, yes they are, and twitter is undoubtedly in terms of reach/impact one of the most important tech companies in the last decade, whether they actually sustain moving forward is another question
So was pets.com at its time (and countless others). The time scale is different, but ... if twitter crashes and burns soon because it can't make any money, it will have left more impact on the history books, but ultimately will be remembered as "a facebook like also-ran, that only had a whats-on-your-mind line"
Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square
#69Jack actually walked out of the Twitter meeting where they were explaining the layoffs to the leftover employees. I'm sure he had an important meeting though.
FTA even the chairman of the board who, by definition, is Jack's direct boss had to taxicab him to have their weekly one on one. I am not sure I buy this, unless Jack is avoiding these meetings. WTF else is Jack doing? For God's sake, the other guy is not just some type of investment bank MBAs, he's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omid_Kordestani and was early employee and executive at both Netscape and Google. I reall…
He has a pretty hot girlfriend. I follow her on Instagram and based on her Instagram posts it looks like she and Jack jet set around the world traveling pretty constantly. Lots of art galleries, fashion shows, film festivals type stuff.
Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huh, I can't see anything uncivil in the post you linked to. Copypasted the wrong one?
The comment I chided wasn't 10798178 (which indeed was fine), but an uncivil reply to it which its author subsequently deleted. The deletion is what made this confusing. You should see "[deleted]" just above my comment upthread—that's a stand-in for the post I was replying to.
Ah, now I get it. I thought the "deleted" was a result of detaching that post.