151–160 of 167 posts
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And people lose their jobs, and get kicked out of their homes, etc.
That is a old armchair argument made from those in an ivory tower. If it was YOUR business, you would want to control your dream, your vision -- not a bunch of rich folks who could decide to kick you out from your dream if your main goal is not to _remain profitable to the shareholders_.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is a old armchair argument made from those in an ivory tower. If it was YOUR business, you would want to control your dream, your vision -- not a bunch of rich folks who could decide to kick you out from your dream if your main goal is not to _remain profitable to the shareholders_.
Once you take investments, you are deciding to me be beholden to those rich folk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know. I also listed some (Qualtrics, Adobe). However, I have no way of telling if some of the companies on your list are any more legitimate than Domo, which has for years been heralded as a legitimate tech company in the area. To clarify (since not all of the companies you listed are in Utah Valley), my criticism was directed specifically at Utah County, not the whole state (i.e. not Salt Lake City or Davis county…
I don't know why people never mention https://instructure.com for Utah startups but I work for them and they seem great!
They had a billion dollar IPO in a few short years, they hire good engineering talent, and they pay their people well and with great benefits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Typically the founder of a company owns the company. So unless you want to buy the founder out, the founder still has ownership. Sure the moment it goes public, you need to ask the question 'who leads?', but you will have to buy out the owenership.
This is not typical at all for tech startups. If you take investment, the founder's share declines quickly: https://www.lawtrades.com/blog/answers/usual-share-percentag... Even a single founder can be under 50% by the end of the series A, as you not only have two rounds of investors, but you have to carve out a chunk of equity for employees (10-15%). And if you have multiple founders, which is typical, no one founder…
I think you knew what I meant. Or your head is in the clouds.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know why people never mention https://instructure.com for Utah startups but I work for them and they seem great!
Again to clarify, I didn't mention them because they are based in Salt Lake. There are lots of great places in Salt Lake, but the discussion above was focused on Utah County (Provo, Orem, Lehi, etc.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Are we going to say Amazon isn't going to be hugely influential in the tech scene of wherever they choose their HQ2 to be, simply because they aren't a startup and are based in Seattle?
I'd love to see the LA Times go back and revisit the Utah Valley region and the culture that helped contribute to this. The Utah Valley is chock full of startups with a serious inferiority complex to their big brothers in Silicon Valley, hence derivative name. More importantly, Utah is the “multi-level marketing capital of the world [1]” This kind of sales and growth tactic is not limited to the diet smoothie and cos…