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

What's Actually Wrong with Yahoo's Purchase of Summly

hackingdistributed.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 288 posts

Re: What's Actually Wrong with Yahoo's Purchase of Summly

#41

Post by cube13 »

powertower wrote: post #27

I dont understand why the current wave of criticism is leaving the market penetration (and 1st mover advantage), brand, and million users (and climbing) out of the picture - like it's not important. And are assuming that Yahoo must of paid it all to hire 3 people.

Uh, the end result is that Yahoo paid for all of it to hire 3 people.

The app has been pulled from the app store( http://summly.tumblr.com/post/46247554262/yahoo-agrees-to-ac... ), and it does not sound like it's going to be back. Which is a disappointment, because I wanted to know exactly what the heck the app is, since I've never heard of it before.

So Yahoo's dropped any market penetration, the entire brand, and the million users. For 3 engineers and a few software API licenses.

Re: What's Actually Wrong with Yahoo's Purchase of Summly

#42

Post by minimax »

So, what is Yahoo signaling to the world? "We value glue more than thought."

What? No it doesn't signal that at all. Look at Yahoo's other recent acquisitions. Yahoo is buying mobile app companies. Spinning it as technology vs glue is silly. It's all about buying expertise in mobile.

Re: What's Actually Wrong with Yahoo's Purchase of Summly

#43

Post by benastan »

It doesn't seem to matter what the app does or how its built.

The story goes something like (a) people (yahoo) want mobile apps (b) the kid got investors to give him cash (c) people downloaded it generating 'buzz' (d) more investors and cash (e) more downloads and publicity (f) yahoo plays right into the hands of the investors and the hype around a young founder (g) yahoo buys the company, making the kid a millionaire, it's a PR grand slam, bringing more publicity and 'users' to the app (for now)

It works out really, really well for the investors and founder; in my opinion it seems like Yahoo got duped.

Re: What's Actually Wrong with Yahoo's Purchase of Summly

#44

Post by cube13 »

benastan wrote: post #43

It doesn't seem to matter what the app does or how its built. The story goes something like (a) people (yahoo) want mobile apps (b) the kid got investors to give him cash (c) people downloaded it generating 'buzz' (d) more investors and cash (e) more downloads and publicity (f) yahoo plays right into the hands of the investors and the hype around a young founder (g) yahoo buys the company, making the kid a millionair…

>yahoo buys the company, making the kid a millionaire, it's a PR grand slam, bringing more publicity and 'users' to the app (for now)

There aren't any new users getting added. The app's been pulled from the iOS app store.

http://summly.tumblr.com/post/46247554262/yahoo-agrees-to-ac...

Re: What's Actually Wrong with Yahoo's Purchase of Summly

#45

Post by rdouble »

alaskamiller wrote: post #12

Overpaying for apps is the new overpaying for social networks for that vague master bullshit artistry of "reaching" users. Yahoo irrationally overpays for tons of stuff, AOL irrationally overpaid for Bebo, there was that high school girl that made a social network and makes millions of dollars so she bought her mom a house, there are plenty of other data points I filed away in my head over the years. Tons of things h…

It's more like Yahoo! is overpaying for app development teams. They have to, as they are way behind in mobile and nobody good wants to work there.

Re: What's Actually Wrong with Yahoo's Purchase of Summly

#46

Post by JumpCrisscross »

"But it's critical to keep tabs on the ratio known as 'glue versus thought.' Sure, both imply progress and both are necessary. But the former is eminently mundane, replaceable, and outsource-able. The latter is typically what gives a company its edge, what is generally regarded as a competitive advantage."

I am in finance. I am glue. I take existing people, things (read: capital), and ideas and bolt them together. Glue is the socioeconomic fabric that gives value to ideas, things, and ultimately people.

It's not just finance. Craigslist? Airbnb? Facebook? Apple? Glue. Put it this way: if you walked out the door with their source code, how much of their value could you replicate? Put it another way: how much would you pay to walk out the door with their source code and physical assets? Put it another way: how much would you pay to walk out the door with their source code, physical assets, and low to mid-level developers but none of their senior guys?

We have laws to protect intellectual property because thoughts and technologies are copyable, fungible, and ultimately outsource-able. We don't need such laws to protect relationships, the gluiest of glues. In fact, we need laws to break down their strength.

Re: What's Actually Wrong with Yahoo's Purchase of Summly

#47

Post by dvt »

Article screams of "you jelly?"

And most of us are, indeed, jelly. The bottom line is, if you're into start-ups, you understand that in many ways it's a lottery. Instagram won last week, then Pinterest, and now Summly. This is the norm. Over-paying for products that aren't really even products.

I'm surprised a professor at Cornell hasn't understood the VC culture yet. I was talking to a friend last week about this cute chick he wanted to introduce me to. Turns out she works at a relatively famous startup in L.A. as a secretary. It also turns out that she makes more than my mom (who's a research chemist). I've just learned to /sigh, move on and then quickly get back to work.

Throwing money around is how Silicon Valley works. Get used to it.

Re: What's Actually Wrong with Yahoo's Purchase of Summly

#48

Post by samstave »

rdouble wrote: post #45
alaskamiller wrote: post #12

Overpaying for apps is the new overpaying for social networks for that vague master bullshit artistry of "reaching" users. Yahoo irrationally overpays for tons of stuff, AOL irrationally overpaid for Bebo, there was that high school girl that made a social network and makes millions of dollars so she bought her mom a house, there are plenty of other data points I filed away in my head over the years. Tons of things h…

It's more like Yahoo! is overpaying for app development teams. They have to, as they are way behind in mobile and nobody good wants to work there.

EXACTLY!

I've been saying this for the last three years here on Hn: Yahoo is stupid to not be aggressively and heavily spending their massive cash reserves to buy back into an innovative place here in the valley.

Mayer is no dope! She knows that being the convoluted portal that Yahoo is, is a death sentence. They need to act quick and fast and often.

Buying up a very young tech upstart is a good step toward splicing in some new, nimble DNA - which Yahoo needs desperately.

$30MM is also a marketing number!

Remember when everyone's exit plan was Google or Facebook? Well, add Yahoo to the list for exit acquire players.

Re: What's Actually Wrong with Yahoo's Purchase of Summly

#49

Post by acchow »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #46

" But it's critical to keep tabs on the ratio known as 'glue versus thought.' Sure, both imply progress and both are necessary. But the former is eminently mundane, replaceable, and outsource-able. The latter is typically what gives a company its edge, what is generally regarded as a competitive advantage. " I am in finance. I am glue. I take existing people, things (read: capital), and ideas and bolt them together.…

> It is the socioeconomic fabric that gives meaning to ideas, things, and ultimately people.

What are you saying? Google, Craigslist, the Museum of Natural History and Earnest Hemingway have no meaning without glue like finance?

Re: What's Actually Wrong with Yahoo's Purchase of Summly

#50

Post by alexvr »

As a fellow 17-year-old, I have nothing less than respect for Nick. You're obviously doing something right if you sell your company for $30M before you're an adult. Who cares if he's not an AI researcher? The scholar who wrote this article can't bash this kid's product until he actually builds something useful. If he came up with a revolutionary AI theory, great. But the people who take an experimental idea and see the value in it are the people who change the world. Einstein came up with some good theories, but nobody will remember his name when someone uses the theories to create a time machine.

Are we going to ridicule Tesla Motors for making (highly innovative) cars because they licensed the steering wheel or navigation system from another company?

Post reply on HN