41–50 of 62 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And he almost did it again - if he "exited" at the peak of Color.
When was Color's peak exactly? When they raised money? Because after that, it was mostly failures after failures.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
English isn't my first language and I really have a hard time grasping the meaning, the subtelty, of the end of the article. Does the author say: "Apple bought some employes for a high price ($80M). Later, those employees left Apple for another venture. But when leaving, those employees also left some kind of shares/bonus or something very valuable they obtained by being acquired earlier. They were acquired again lat…
The Lala acquisition was worth a total of $160M. $80M up front, and $80M as an earn out (over time). When they left Apple early to do Color, they lost a huge chunk of that $80M (earn out money) because they left early before receiving it (vesting) which in the end was worth a lot more due to increase in stock value. Apple bought Color (and those same engineers returned to work at Apple) for a lot less than what they…
This makes much better sense to me now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't the notion of this being genius imply that Apple "let them get away" the first time because they knew they'd be able to acquire their next company for less? Or am I missing something?
Its a very sycophantic article that gives Apple far too much credit. No "genius" strategy was involved it was just fortunate (for Apple) that they could acquire the remnants of Color for such a low price.
Fascinating story. Fast Company did a piece on Bill Nguyen about 18 months ago: ( http://www.fastcompany.com/1784823/bill-nguyen-boy-bubble ) and included an infographic on his track record: http://infographics.fastcompany.com/magazine/160/bill-nguyen... For a bunch of companies that have widely been considered failures in terms of product and number of users, he has had some unbelievable exits and financial successe…
I do not understood the tale :( Why it was genius?
Those employees were given options at Apple ($80M worth) that were probably lost once they left the company to work at Color. Then Apple ended up getting them back on the cheap. So instead of $160M, Apple ended up paying $80M + $7M.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those employees were given options at Apple ($80M worth) that were probably lost once they left the company to work at Color. Then Apple ended up getting them back on the cheap. So instead of $160M, Apple ended up paying $80M + $7M.
What did Apple even end up paying for though?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I struggle to even respect it. He ripped them off; the world would be better off without his "hustle".
He ripped nobody off, he sold a company in the exact way you're supposed to sell a company or for that matter the exact way you sell anything with a limited supply. Heck thats how you sell a house. Step 1. Find interested parties, Step 2. Get Bids. Step 3. Allow other interested parties to counter. Thats it there's no scam here. Its not even genius its company selling 101. Everyone involved had the opportunity to do…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When was Color's peak exactly? When they raised money? Because after that, it was mostly failures after failures.
And before that, too. I'm still struggling to see what, if anything, Color did to enhance anybody's life.
I'm not saying that a fleeting moment of entertainment in the lives of a few jaded technology folk was a good return on that investment, mind!
The genius here was Bill Nguyen turning a failing company and a pittance $11mm offer from one failing company (Nokia) into an $80-160mm buyout from a real company (Apple), essentially though hustle alone. But it's zero-sum genius. I can respect him for being good at playing a specific game, but it's not a game I want to play myself.
This is how business people get paid the big bucks. All your startup's engineering work = $11 million A month of CEO hustling = $149 million
Bill Nguyen was on the board I think.