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

WeWork’s Adam Neumann Steps Down as CEO

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 551 posts

Re: WeWork’s Adam Neumann Steps Down as CEO

#161

Post by dehrmann »

jwc1 wrote: post #113
yroc92 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are employees even able to sell on IPO day?

In a traditional IPO, there is generally a 90-180 day lockup period for existing shareholders (to prevent shares from flooding the market on day 1). This is one of the big benefits of a direct listing (see Spotify/Slack)...any shareholder can sell stock on day one.

> to prevent shares from flooding the market on day 1

These are common, but I don't think they apply to all share classes, so the big boys are free to get their money out.

Re: WeWork’s Adam Neumann Steps Down as CEO

#162

Post by ngngngng »

sah2ed wrote: post #151
ngngngng wrote: post #17

I'm so glad I read hacker news. I almost took a job at WeWork just 2 months ago with a recruiter working very hard to convince me I'd be rich when they IPO. Now I'm at a much smaller startup called Weave which is a really phenomenal place to work. I didn't discover until recently that it's also a YCombinator company. edit: to clarify, hacker news has been extremely skeptical of WeWork for some time, due to this, I wa…

> I'm so glad I read hacker news. I almost took a job at WeWork just 2 months ago with a recruiter working very hard to convince me I'd be rich when they IPO. Did a 2-month old HN comment foretell WeWork imploding which informed your decision to decline their offer, or reading HN in general helped you determine that their offer would be close to worthless, compared to your options at that time?

I edited to clarify. I was skeptical of WeWork because hacker news has been skeptical of them for quite a long time.

Re: WeWork’s Adam Neumann Steps Down as CEO

#163

Post by anigbrowl »

ngngngng wrote: post #22
strikelaserclaw wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone with unbridled belief in themselves.

I lean towards this being ignorant hubris. I don't think he set out to scam investors.

Let me give you an insight into the thought process here:

'It's not unethical if I don't feel bad about it.'

The key to operating this way to is cultivate a sense of belief in your own BS - inspire others by having the 'vision thing', saying 'I wish you could see what I can see' etc. Ignore anything negative and devote as little thought to it as possible because what people are buying into is your sunny disposition - they don't really want to analyze your stuff, they want to feel the way you look: radiantly confident. So you just think happy thoughts and if anyone asks you troubling questions re-articulate your vision of heaven/ profits/ national pride/ whatever and make a performance of being nurtured by that beautiful vision alone, before mentioning that anyone can share it for 3 easy payments of $____.

Re: WeWork’s Adam Neumann Steps Down as CEO

#165

Post by dbuder »

jamestimmins wrote: post #28

I get the impression that SoftBank learned the wrong lesson from Uber. While Uber also raised billions of dollars and had a CEO get forced out by investors, it was broadly understood that his sin was creating a toxic/sexist culture. It wasn't related to business fundamentals, per se. WeWork's sins were less of rampant sexism, and more closely related to an unreasonable valuation and a business that wasn't prepared fo…

Don't be in awe of any VC or banker and hire your own lawyer.

Re: WeWork’s Adam Neumann Steps Down as CEO

#167

Post by gbjw »

anm89 wrote: post #131
duxup wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if there is some lingering idea inside their own head that what they're doing is nonsense ... so more nonsense seems pretty logical.

The ultimate lesson is that very few people, even those who seem wildly successful have any idea what they are doing. This is why narcissist and people who are overconfident to the point of absurdity often excel and business at life. No body else has any idea what they are doing, their competitors mostly have no idea what they are doing, and they are willing to project that they know what they are doing unconditional…

This is basically the take-away of much of modern philosophical thought (absurdism/existentialism). Existence precedes essence... we are thrust into the world with no 'idea' of what's meaningful or important. People gravitate to those who have well-defined vision since working towards something (even if that thing is ultimately flawed in some way) feels better than idly spinning your wheels waiting to die.

Re: WeWork’s Adam Neumann Steps Down as CEO

#168

Post by codesushi42 »

ngngngng wrote: post #17

I'm so glad I read hacker news. I almost took a job at WeWork just 2 months ago with a recruiter working very hard to convince me I'd be rich when they IPO. Now I'm at a much smaller startup called Weave which is a really phenomenal place to work. I didn't discover until recently that it's also a YCombinator company. edit: to clarify, hacker news has been extremely skeptical of WeWork for some time, due to this, I wa…

Same here, and only by reading the headlines. A WeWork recruiter reached out to me. I laughed out loud and added it to the list of companies I would never work for. Not only do they do nothing interesting, but they are apparently unethical as well.

No doubt another failed tech bro pump 'n dump scheme headed to the dustbin of history.

Re: WeWork’s Adam Neumann Steps Down as CEO

#169

Post by ThrustVectoring »

chooseaname wrote: post #136
Jaygles wrote: post #11

You've got to wonder what kind of a person is it that can get so far in building a successful behemoth like this but at the same time is able to seriously put forward ideas like becoming President of the world or asking management to cut 20% of the workforce yearly

> You've got to wonder what kind of a person is it that can get so far in building a successful behemoth like this... Makes you wonder if being a CEO is really worth 400X the average salary of the plebs or if it's all just luck and smooth talking.

It isn't, corporate leadership is effectively a tournament and CEO and executive salaries are the prize for winning it. The point of having a high prize is to get a lot of people to compete for it, not to reward the winners for the effort they've put it (which may only be slightly more than the runner up, while the reward is several times what the runner up gets).

Like, do you think the best golfer in the PGA tournament is "really worth" ten times as much money as the 14th best golfer? Did they work ten times as hard?

Post reply on HN