51–60 of 155 posts
If you're the initial owner you'll be happy to let Yahoo buy your product for multi-millions of dollars, and you'll be even happier to leave the company as quick as possible to start up your next app.
Its a pattern: sell, get out ASAP, start next project, (allude to what could have been).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Surely timesheets are never a legal requirement?
While not quite a legal requirement, at the last company I worked for the timesheet was described as something like: If we don't give the government timesheets, they don't pay us our salaries. The one before that said the timesheets were used to do reporting for R&D grants from the government.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you are being acquired, you could say: "We're worried about loosing our culture, which has brought us the success we've seen so far. I want to agree that our group will be allowed to set its own rules to some degree in terms of working environment." And give a few examples. No need to push it or make this legally binding, or even put it in writing. Then, when the timesheet dude shows up (which they will), just s…
The flickr people were pretty good at this. I was less so. One thing that always bugged me - when I ran Delicious, I had people submit a weekly status update (just a list of bullet points) to the entire company. That way everyone knew what was going on. We got to Yahoo, and my boss decided to kill that. When I got to Google, globally visible weekly status in bullet point form are part of the culture. I take this as v…
I'm surprised this is a common scenario. I would think, due to the pervasiveness of the sunk-cost fallacy, that companies would stand behind their aquisitions to a fault even--just cause they spent so much money on them.
I once witnessed the moment when the messenger from the new management team comes over to explain to the brilliant engineers who built the company up from nothing about these "timesheets" they need to fill in, and how it's "really not a big deal". You could feel something dying over the course of the conversation. It was one of the most uncomfortable things I've ever seen, and I'm sure it's far worse if you are one o…
Is there a right way to do this? Yes. a. Make it a fully owned subsidiary. b. Don't fuck with it.
I once witnessed the moment when the messenger from the new management team comes over to explain to the brilliant engineers who built the company up from nothing about these "timesheets" they need to fill in, and how it's "really not a big deal". You could feel something dying over the course of the conversation. It was one of the most uncomfortable things I've ever seen, and I'm sure it's far worse if you are one o…
Why not just do the time-sheets?
I once witnessed the moment when the messenger from the new management team comes over to explain to the brilliant engineers who built the company up from nothing about these "timesheets" they need to fill in, and how it's "really not a big deal". You could feel something dying over the course of the conversation. It was one of the most uncomfortable things I've ever seen, and I'm sure it's far worse if you are one o…
When you are being acquired, you could say: "We're worried about loosing our culture, which has brought us the success we've seen so far. I want to agree that our group will be allowed to set its own rules to some degree in terms of working environment." And give a few examples. No need to push it or make this legally binding, or even put it in writing. Then, when the timesheet dude shows up (which they will), just s…
I once witnessed the moment when the messenger from the new management team comes over to explain to the brilliant engineers who built the company up from nothing about these "timesheets" they need to fill in, and how it's "really not a big deal". You could feel something dying over the course of the conversation. It was one of the most uncomfortable things I've ever seen, and I'm sure it's far worse if you are one o…
Is there a right way to do this? Yes. a. Make it a fully owned subsidiary. b. Don't fuck with it.
I am guessing it can work but founders/entrepreneurs aren't necessarily the best managers and are likely to get bored and be looking for their next startup. As a new owner of a company it seems to make sense to transition the senior management to people who are more suited to managing and running a company rather than those who like building a company.
This goes two fold for those companies who have primarily technical founders who are almost always unsuited for the roles in senior management.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a right way to do this? Yes. a. Make it a fully owned subsidiary. b. Don't fuck with it.
Do you have some examples of where that has worked in the medium - long term? (i.e longer than the 2-3 year mark most of these founders have bailed out at) I am guessing it can work but founders/entrepreneurs aren't necessarily the best managers and are likely to get bored and be looking for their next startup. As a new owner of a company it seems to make sense to transition the senior management to people who are mo…
Also, the issue isn't that the founders leave; it's that the energy does. Founders are always going to leave.
There are 2 companies which Yahoo! acquired: 1) Overture. If you look at the financial reports, nearly 50% of Yahoo's revenue is from search. They acquired Overture for ~1B 2) They acquired RocketMail (essentially Yahoo! mail). Most people I know, when they think of Yahoo, they think of Yahoo! mail. So, while its easy to say they messed up many acquisitions (esp the infamous 3B offer for Broadcast.com), the 2 acquisi…