101–110 of 186 posts
I wouldn't touch that with a ten foot poll.
Was 538 ABC's property during the first Trump election? IIRC they took a pretty big credibility hit after getting that election so wrong and never really recovered.
> pretty big credibility hit after getting that election so wrong That this is the narrative that survived the election is one of the greatest indictments for our society's ability to engage in critical thinking. The day before the election, the Huffington Post published a hit piece criticising Nate for overrating Trump's odds and inspiring panic. Huffpost predicted a 98.2% chance of Clinton winning, NYT predicted 85…
But yes, I agree with you that it's surprising to hear people on Hacker News having the 180 degrees wrong impression that the general population appears to have taken away from the one thing normal people care about polling for: during presidential elections.
> BTW, I approached ABC about buying back the former FiveThirtyEight IP*, and they said they wouldn't sell at any price because I'd criticized their management of the brand. --Nate Silver (538 founder) ABC seem pretty petty here.
So Nate & Co sell out to a big corporation then are upset that it does big corporation stuff? I'm more mad at Nate here because 538 was my go-to for political coverage pre-sellout, and because of his greed it went away.
Sometimes companies acquire upcoming competitors specifically to shut them down so that existing cash cow product lines can continue.
> BTW, I approached ABC about buying back the former FiveThirtyEight IP*, and they said they wouldn't sell at any price because I'd criticized their management of the brand. --Nate Silver (538 founder) ABC seem pretty petty here.
So Nate & Co sell out to a big corporation then are upset that it does big corporation stuff? I'm more mad at Nate here because 538 was my go-to for political coverage pre-sellout, and because of his greed it went away.
Not all acquisitions are for direct financial profit. Sometimes companies acquire upcoming competitors specifically to shut them down so that existing cash cow product lines can continue.
> BTW, I approached ABC about buying back the former FiveThirtyEight IP*, and they said they wouldn't sell at any price because I'd criticized their management of the brand. --Nate Silver (538 founder) ABC seem pretty petty here.
So Nate & Co sell out to a big corporation then are upset that it does big corporation stuff? I'm more mad at Nate here because 538 was my go-to for political coverage pre-sellout, and because of his greed it went away.
If his comment is accurate, then ABC’s decision is a clear lose-lose decision driven entirely by personal spite.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ABC's shareholders are Disney. Whatever Nate offered them isn't even a rounding error in Disney's $36 billion dollars in profits last year. The shareholders aren't going to care.
Disney's 2025 profit was $12B: https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/DIS/disney/net-inc...
$12B profit is obscenely large.