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

Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder

fortune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 115 posts

Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder

#91

Post by zavulon »

gonzo wrote: post #89
at-fates-hands wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Money. Greed. It destroys more friendships (and marriages) than anything else. This a thousand time. My first hard earned rule of thumb? Don't do business with your friends. Lost relationships, bitterness, and great financial loss is never worth it. I got burned really bad and spent the better part of four years trying to get my money back. Since then, it's just something I live by.

Friends? OK But I've been in business with my spouse for over a decade now.

That's different. Your spouse's and yours financial interests are most likely aligned - you are both bringing in money to one family, so most likely there are no arguments who gets how much. With friends, you and your friend are competing for the same financial pie.

Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder

#92

Post by jsmthrowaway »

mbesto wrote: post #64
downandout wrote: post #2

As a co-founder who got screwed on a large acquisition, it makes me happy to see that Snapchat finally settled. However, a settlement doesn't change the fact that Evan Spiegel really went out of his way to intentionally screw the guy that actually invented Snapchat's model - and seemed to enjoy doing it. He's definitely not someone I'd ever do business with. http://www.businessinsider.com/snapchat-lawsuit-video-depos…

A few friends of mine saw Evan speak at Stanford this past spring. He was in a room with Eric Schmidt and Sam Altman (IIRC) and his attitude towards them was nothing short of smug. I don't remember the specifics of what he said but my friends said he basically "told Eric, Sam and other prominent VCs on the panel off because he thought he was more successful than them". Take that for what it's worth.

Anecdotes wherein the spokesman wasn't even present intrigue me, particularly when it's gossip about notable figures. I'm not sure what value you expect us to find in a retelling of your friend's subjective experience. Hell, for all we know, you could be making the entire story up.

One time I saw Sergey Brin be mean to someone. Take that for what it's worth. Maybe he's EVIL.

Don't read my comment as defending anyone. I really couldn't care less about Evan Spiegel, so I don't dance on his settlement like most comments here are doing, but this whole TMZ "we got video of Evan being smug at a panel, CLICK HERE" comment thread is just the worst of this industry. Ask yourself if you've contributed to life in the manner you expect as you typed out that comment.

Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder

#93

Post by alelefant »

cookiecaper wrote: post #74
mbesto wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few friends of mine saw Evan speak at Stanford this past spring. He was in a room with Eric Schmidt and Sam Altman (IIRC) and his attitude towards them was nothing short of smug. I don't remember the specifics of what he said but my friends said he basically "told Eric, Sam and other prominent VCs on the panel off because he thought he was more successful than them". Take that for what it's worth.

>Take that for what it's worth. Which is nothing. We don't have the context and it's always amazing how people, even just observers with no skin in the game, will have wildly divergent interpretations of the same events. There's definitely some interpretation going on here as Snapchat guy almost assuredly didn't say "I'm more successful than you".

You don't need expertise in a particular profession to come to the conclusion that someone is being smug, rude, etc. If I saw someone on the street being disrespectful, is it unfair for me to come to that conclusion because I don't fully understand their field of work?

Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder

#94

Post by wisty »

philwelch wrote: post #65
w0rd-driven wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think having the founders own a total of 50% is a seemingly high risk but that is totally opinion based. If the other entire 50% rise up in agreement could they halt the company? Wouldn't 60-40 in favor of the founders give them a little more leverage because after all it is their shared idea/vision/etc and they should be shouldering a large part of the risk. If you're ever in a situation where the entire remainder…

If you're especially worried about it, you can pick one co-founder (perhaps the CEO) and give him +1 share so the money is still relatively even but the cofounders can outvote the rest. In practice I think once you have a board, it's more important to control the board than worry about base share distribution.

Or you sell one share to a mutually trusted advisor for $1.

Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder

#95

Post by nailer »

vladtaltos wrote: post #43
nailer wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the Businessweek link, Brown seemed to contribute an idea. And that's it. Nothing unique (disappearing photo apps existed before, see the rest of the thread). No programming expertise, he didn't make anything.

read their statement carefully: “We acknowledge Reggie’s contribution to the creation of Snapchat and appreciate his work in getting the application off the ground.” I wouldn't think they'd add a sentence like this to their press release if his only contribution was only an idea.

The founders didn't think he had the technical expertise to make the app so they didn't involve him in that. A legal statement, made to placate a litigant does not change that.

Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder

#96

Post by trhway »

sk5t wrote: post #54
dvdhsu wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Found it copied here: http://www.gravitycomputing.co.nz/joels-totally-fair-method-... """ This is such a common question here and elsewhere that I will attempt to write the world’s most canonical answer to this question. Hopefully in the future when someone on answers.onstartups asks how to split up the ownership of their new company, you can simply point to this answer. The most important principle: Fairness, and th…

Good read, but the IOU plan is nonsensical... cash in one hand, or an IOU for the same amount in the other, issued by an entity with a very high likelihood of failure? What? Maybe if the IOU started accumulating 20% interest.

having debt, high rising debt ... don't think that would play well with early investors... and without early investors it is pretty hard for a startup to live to see the late investors.

Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder

#97

Post by cookiecaper »

alelefant wrote: post #93
cookiecaper wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Take that for what it's worth. Which is nothing. We don't have the context and it's always amazing how people, even just observers with no skin in the game, will have wildly divergent interpretations of the same events. There's definitely some interpretation going on here as Snapchat guy almost assuredly didn't say "I'm more successful than you".

You don't need expertise in a particular profession to come to the conclusion that someone is being smug, rude, etc. If I saw someone on the street being disrespectful, is it unfair for me to come to that conclusion because I don't fully understand their field of work?

I didn't say anything about the field of work, so I'm not sure what you're getting at. We don't have the context of the conversation or panel in which the supposedly dismissive and/or smug comments occurred and we don't have enough information to make our own conclusion on the behavior or the reliability of the assessment given here.

There are many reasons someone may feel that a speaker is smug. Some may be warranted and some may not. Since we don't know what happened and can't evaluate whether the parent's friends made a correct assessment or not, with this type of matter, it's best to just ignore it entirely. It has nothing to do with our familiarity with anyone's line of work.

Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder

#98

Post by discardorama »

srj wrote: post #90
discardorama wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have an experience... I think we all do! ;-) Back in the day, I was a co-founder in a company, started by my advisor's wife. She called us (me and a colleague) to their house, and promised the two of us 20% ownership (and the remaining 60% she kept). I worked like a dog for about 1.5 years, spending nights and weekends getting it off the ground (the business was website creation and other backend stuff). We manag…

Presumably you have your PhD now? Why not sue today?

I thought about it after I graduated. The problem is: in the initial years, people ask for recommendations from your advisor; and as a PhD, you are basically tied to your advisor for life (people will always ask: who was your advisor?).

After some thought, I decided to give it a rest and move on. I had learnt a valuable (and very pricey) lesson: always take things in writing.

Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder

#99

Post by bmm6o »

sk5t wrote: post #54
dvdhsu wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Found it copied here: http://www.gravitycomputing.co.nz/joels-totally-fair-method-... """ This is such a common question here and elsewhere that I will attempt to write the world’s most canonical answer to this question. Hopefully in the future when someone on answers.onstartups asks how to split up the ownership of their new company, you can simply point to this answer. The most important principle: Fairness, and th…

Good read, but the IOU plan is nonsensical... cash in one hand, or an IOU for the same amount in the other, issued by an entity with a very high likelihood of failure? What? Maybe if the IOU started accumulating 20% interest.

Sure, you'd want to be compensated for time and risk, but on the other hand you don't want to saddle the company with a ton of debt. It depends on how much money you're talking about. Either way, the point remains that it shouldn't be paid for with equity.

Re: Apple event overshadows unflattering news at Snapchat, Tinder

#100

Post by foolishdream »

mbesto wrote: post #64
downandout wrote: post #2

As a co-founder who got screwed on a large acquisition, it makes me happy to see that Snapchat finally settled. However, a settlement doesn't change the fact that Evan Spiegel really went out of his way to intentionally screw the guy that actually invented Snapchat's model - and seemed to enjoy doing it. He's definitely not someone I'd ever do business with. http://www.businessinsider.com/snapchat-lawsuit-video-depos…

A few friends of mine saw Evan speak at Stanford this past spring. He was in a room with Eric Schmidt and Sam Altman (IIRC) and his attitude towards them was nothing short of smug. I don't remember the specifics of what he said but my friends said he basically "told Eric, Sam and other prominent VCs on the panel off because he thought he was more successful than them". Take that for what it's worth.

I saw a user testimony prominently featured on mbesto’s startup homepage. Turns out the testimony is quoting himself on how great his startup is.

Take that for what it’s worth.

Post reply on HN