Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hype and plunder: Domo a new low for self-indulgent IPOs

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 167 posts

Re: Hype and plunder: Domo a new low for self-indulgent IPOs

#141

Post by Lazare »

s73v3r_ wrote: post #64
throwaway5752 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Practically speaking Satya Nadella runs MSFT, not the board of directors. Nadella does not have control of MSFT (he isn't the majority holder of shareholder voting rights), though. Investors don't want to run the company. But the question is should they be able to fire the person running the company, even if that person is acting against the interests of the rest of the shareholders. * ps, yes, the BoD can fire a CEO…

Shouldn't the law prevent the CEO from doing just that? I mean, the board is presumably the only check on the CEO's power, so even if the CEO is the majority shareholder, they shouldn't be able to control the board.

There are some checks; the controlling shareholder still has to respect the other shareholders.

But yes, as the controlling shareholder, you can fire the board. That's what being the controlling shareholder means; the one and (basically, only) thing you get to do is appoint a board to run your company on your behalf. And you can keep firing the board until you find some lackeys who will agree to do whatever you want, including hiring you in any position you care to to name, including, why not, the CEO role. That's totally legit.

If what you want harms the minority shareholders, then they can sue, and depending on the details, they'll have a great change of winning. CBS and Viacom are currently working through this right now; the controlling shareholder wants to ram through a merger, and the CBS board thinks it's a bad idea. Under pretty settled law, she can fire the board in revenge, but if the merger is actually bad (and the fact that the current board found it so is strong evidence that it might be), then she can't just replace the board with people who will agree to it.

> the board is presumably the only check on the CEO's power

The board is there to look after shareholders. If they fail, then lawsuits from shareholders are the final check on CEO power. That doesn't change much just because the CEO is the controlling shareholder.

Re: Hype and plunder: Domo a new low for self-indulgent IPOs

#143

Post by rossdavidh »

aetherson wrote: post #139
rossdavidh wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I found that same point quite problematic. There are basically two possibilities: 1) the founder is able to get this plane off the ground 2) the founder is not able to In case (1), running it by committee is going to mess it up. The nature of a startup is that it is not doing ordinary, well-tested things, so no committee is going to approve what they do. Only a founder (or two) can get things off the ground wit…

You have a false dichotomy between "running by committee" and "giving the founder complete control." Trying to have the board literally run the company is not generally a great idea. Having one or more non-founders in the leadership of the company, including possibly the CEO spot, is a fine idea and was how it used to pretty routinely be done. When the company is very small, it probably doesn't make sense to inject a…

Certainly there is a continuum there, but the decisions that a founder makes that are most likely to be critical for a startup's success, are the very ones that are most likely to be opposed by non-founders, because they will be the most unconventional. Typical startups fail.

"how it used to pretty routinely be done" was kind of like what was called "adult supervision", as I recall, back in the late 90's. I don't find that the success rate of the late 90's startups (the dot-com bust) to be all that much better than the current boom (which, granted, is not totally bust yet but no doubt will).

Re: Hype and plunder: Domo a new low for self-indulgent IPOs

#144

Post by anitil »

dpark wrote: post #29

> Domo actually is part of the Salt Lake City region’s “Silicon Slope,” one of several regional offshoots of Silicon Valley. Going off on a tangent, this is really dumb. It’s not an “offshoot” of Silicon Valley. It’s a distant, unrelated region that happens to also have a tech industry. Are Austin, Seattle, and Portland also “offshoots” of Silicon Valley? How about New York? Zurich?

Oh dear, don't get me started on 'Silicon Beach' (Bondi Beach, Sydney)...

Re: Hype and plunder: Domo a new low for self-indulgent IPOs

#145

Post by whatsstolat »

58x14 wrote: post #45

I share the name of the CEO (it’s quite common) and I own the domain hack joshjam.es. A few years back I drove out to Salt Lake City to see if he would have any interest in purchasing it... now that I know the company is throwing money away, I’m tempted to retry!

Post back on how you do. :-).

Re: Hype and plunder: Domo a new low for self-indulgent IPOs

#146

Post by toomanybeersies »

pm90 wrote: post #34
dpark wrote: post #29

> Domo actually is part of the Salt Lake City region’s “Silicon Slope,” one of several regional offshoots of Silicon Valley. Going off on a tangent, this is really dumb. It’s not an “offshoot” of Silicon Valley. It’s a distant, unrelated region that happens to also have a tech industry. Are Austin, Seattle, and Portland also “offshoots” of Silicon Valley? How about New York? Zurich?

Its a lazy way to jump on the SV bandwagon. So Austin is/was known as Silicon Hills or something and there are many other Silicon Something monikers for other places.

I've heard it called Silicon Prairie, which it was called way back in the 70's and 80's. It does make sense though, since Texas Instruments and various computer companies were based there, which is the same reason Silicon Valley got its name.

If anything, Austin is more deserving of the "Silicon X" moniker than the Bay Area, as TI invented the silicon transistor and the integrated circuit.

Re: Hype and plunder: Domo a new low for self-indulgent IPOs

#147

Post by valuearb »

tntn wrote: post #41
dpark wrote: post #29

> Domo actually is part of the Salt Lake City region’s “Silicon Slope,” one of several regional offshoots of Silicon Valley. Going off on a tangent, this is really dumb. It’s not an “offshoot” of Silicon Valley. It’s a distant, unrelated region that happens to also have a tech industry. Are Austin, Seattle, and Portland also “offshoots” of Silicon Valley? How about New York? Zurich?

Right on. "Silicon Slopes" is surprisingly effective attempt by Utah County people to get investors to dump money there. Quick summary of the companies in "Silicon Slopes": Qualtrics (surveys), Domo (vapor), Adobe, Micron (fab only, but claim to "silicon" in the name), Nu Skin (MLM cosmetics/diet supplements) , doterra (essential oil MLM), NatureSunshine (MLM). Great place to be. Lots of innovation in MLMs.

Adobe? It’s not a startup, and it wasn’t headquartered in Utah, they were in Mountain View, CA when I met with Warnock.

It’s like having Oregon claim EBay because a tiny fraction of the company is in Portland.

Re: Hype and plunder: Domo a new low for self-indulgent IPOs

#148

Post by toomanybeersies »

anitil wrote: post #144
dpark wrote: post #29

> Domo actually is part of the Salt Lake City region’s “Silicon Slope,” one of several regional offshoots of Silicon Valley. Going off on a tangent, this is really dumb. It’s not an “offshoot” of Silicon Valley. It’s a distant, unrelated region that happens to also have a tech industry. Are Austin, Seattle, and Portland also “offshoots” of Silicon Valley? How about New York? Zurich?

Oh dear, don't get me started on 'Silicon Beach' (Bondi Beach, Sydney)...

What does Melbourne get then; Silicon River?

I've heard Wellington referred to as Silicon Welly before, which is sort of cute. I think that I've only ever heard it used tongue in cheek though, never seriously.

Re: Hype and plunder: Domo a new low for self-indulgent IPOs

#149

Post by toomanybeersies »

tardo99 wrote: post #46
reaperducer wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>silly Domopalooza[1] lifestyle events Reminds me of a particular west coast startup I was associated with that took its final round of funding and blew most of it on a massive out-of-town party. Flew in all of the A-list bankers and tech types it could find. The idea was to make the (failing) app look like a huge deal in the eyes of investors and get bought, thus fulfilling its exit strategy. It worked.

Is the identity of this startup a secret? Maybe someone with a throwaway account could post it? Super curious here...

Pied Piper?

Re: Hype and plunder: Domo a new low for self-indulgent IPOs

#150

Post by fergie »

phamilton wrote: post #101
tntn wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Like door to door summer sales, and the massive bro culture associated with that. But just sign up, you'll make $50000 in 3 months! /s

I feel explaining this for everyone not in the know is appropriate. Mormon missionaries are usually young men ages 18-20 who go out into various places around the world for two years. They learn a lot, generally work really hard, and when they return they usually go off to school. Someone figured out that 2 years knocking on doors to talk about God isn't that different from knocking on doors to talk about . Various c…

TIL- thanks!
Post reply on HN