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

The Problem With Marc Andreessen

blogs.reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 65 posts

Re: The Problem With Marc Andreessen

#11

Post by lbo »

raganwald wrote: post #5
lbo wrote: post #2

Netscape's core was reborn as Firefox. Netscape invented the image tag, along with much of what we consider essential to what the internet is today. Most here would probably attest that it was also the superior product in its day, only losing out to IE thanks to questionably legal monopoly muscling from MS. Opsware was purchased for $1.6bn by HP, hardly a failure... Andreesen has a strong history of execution and val…

Opsware was purchased for $1.6bn by HP, hardly a failure... The thesis of the article is that Marc has been very successful at selling things, but that these things have not been so successful for the people who bought them from him. I don't think you are at odds with the author if you're saying that Marc has been successful at making money.

The article didn't actually give any evidence as to why Opsware was a bad purchase for HP, and according the comments in the article the product still exists and has simply been rebranded.

I suppose I was trying to imply with the $1.6bn price tag that clearly HP thought the product was immensely valuable and I thought "who is the author to say that they were so wrong without a shard of evidence?" Admittedly, I failed to actually draw this line of reasoning in the post at all and have no reason to suppose others would infer it as well.

Re: The Problem With Marc Andreessen

#12

Post by ardillamorris »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #10

The article presents an interesting point of view that I think is probably goes too far. It's not Marc's fault if the giant lumbering behemoths that buy companies don't know what to do with them. That's almost intrinsic in their natures, actually, that they'll screw it up. Even the best tech companies do it time and again, and with very good properties. But this line in particular stands out- "...buy its stake in the…

From the point of view that public markets are accesible to everyone - the secondary market is like a grey market: there's limited information, likelihood of anonymity and weak controls. With that in mind, I would call it "shadowy".

Also, I think making money on timing the market is not a bad thing. To each his own. However, timing the market does not create value. It is merely displacing value or what they call a zero-sum game. I don't think the article goes too far in displaying MA as someone playing that game. In fact, makes the point so valid that it's hard to argue that he has created some sort of permanent value. Other than netscape, the FB board seat is just a fancy chair...

Re: The Problem With Marc Andreessen

#13

Post by blader »

I don't understand.

The man created the web browser, built multiple billion dollar companies, angel invested and sits on the board of Facebook, and is now one of the most well known VCs in the world - and this is saying what - that he's not as good as Felix thinks he could be?

What the hell has Felix Salmon ever done?

I'm seeing more and more of this: pundits and armchair entrepreneurs online who just can't help but tear down people who went in the arena and worked their asses off and built something.

Shut up and go build something people want.

Re: The Problem With Marc Andreessen

#14

Post by wslh »

blader wrote: post #13

I don't understand. The man created the web browser, built multiple billion dollar companies, angel invested and sits on the board of Facebook, and is now one of the most well known VCs in the world - and this is saying what - that he's not as good as Felix thinks he could be? What the hell has Felix Salmon ever done? I'm seeing more and more of this: pundits and armchair entrepreneurs online who just can't help but…

I agree more with Felix than with you. Probably many other people built the same "unsuccessful" companies but can't only sell those companies if they are well connected.

Re: The Problem With Marc Andreessen

#15

Post by RedwoodCity »

blader wrote: post #13

I don't understand. The man created the web browser, built multiple billion dollar companies, angel invested and sits on the board of Facebook, and is now one of the most well known VCs in the world - and this is saying what - that he's not as good as Felix thinks he could be? What the hell has Felix Salmon ever done? I'm seeing more and more of this: pundits and armchair entrepreneurs online who just can't help but…

I'm sure this article keeps Anderson up at night thinking could be as amazing as Felix. Perhaps Anderson could have created the next great thing himself, instead he chose to help other people bring their ideas to the market place. Mentors have a greatly under appreciated roll in the success or failure of companies.

Re: The Problem With Marc Andreessen

#16

Post by TDL »

siavosh wrote: post #9

I'm seeing something very similar happening in SV as happened in Wallstreet prior to when the big mess began in 2008: the media generated cult of personality for people who make money, not successful lasting companies.

I have no problem with making money (even lots of it), but I agree with you that building personality cults is a bad practice by elements within the media. Nothing wrong with deflating personality cults, however, I don't think this article accomplishes that task. This piece smells of a hit piece and typically makes the author looks worse than the intended target.

Re: The Problem With Marc Andreessen

#17

Post by ggchappell »

As long as we're being accurate:

> His single greatest achievement — the creation of the world’s first web browser, Mosaic — took place under the auspices of the National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois.

All correct, except for "first". The world's first web browser was WorldWideWeb[1], written by Tim Berners-Lee. But I suppose it is true that Mosaic was the first browser that got noticed by anyone other than the Chosen Few.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WorldWideWeb

Re: The Problem With Marc Andreessen

#18

Post by ma2rten »

ardillamorris wrote: post #12
waterlesscloud wrote: post #10

The article presents an interesting point of view that I think is probably goes too far. It's not Marc's fault if the giant lumbering behemoths that buy companies don't know what to do with them. That's almost intrinsic in their natures, actually, that they'll screw it up. Even the best tech companies do it time and again, and with very good properties. But this line in particular stands out- "...buy its stake in the…

From the point of view that public markets are accesible to everyone - the secondary market is like a grey market: there's limited information, likelihood of anonymity and weak controls. With that in mind, I would call it "shadowy". Also, I think making money on timing the market is not a bad thing. To each his own. However, timing the market does not create value. It is merely displacing value or what they call a ze…

Actually I think it is quite normal for almost any kind of transaction not to get broadcasting publicity. I fail to see how that is shadowy.

Anyway, why would staring Netscape not be enough value already? After all he himself wrote the Mosic browser that became the basis for all of today's browser. I think very few people have produced more "value" in their lives.

I also don't like the tone of voice of the article. It's pretty much a personal attack only based on the fact that he makes a lot of money.

Re: The Problem With Marc Andreessen

#19

Post by srconstantin »

You don't see something...Ponzi-scheme-ish about the industry? I may not be especially familiar with this, but it sounds like:

1. Man makes short-lived company that makes him rich quickly. 2. Man makes money investing in other short-lived companies that make their founders rich quickly. 3. Successful founders grow up to make money investing in still other short-lived companies.

Maybe I'm totally misinterpreting this, but if there's any truth to this version of the story, it seems like it's heading for disaster. I've already met a lot of startup founders who insist that profitability doesn't matter. How on earth is that attitude sustainable?

Re: The Problem With Marc Andreessen

#20

Post by unreal37 »

blader wrote: post #13

I don't understand. The man created the web browser, built multiple billion dollar companies, angel invested and sits on the board of Facebook, and is now one of the most well known VCs in the world - and this is saying what - that he's not as good as Felix thinks he could be? What the hell has Felix Salmon ever done? I'm seeing more and more of this: pundits and armchair entrepreneurs online who just can't help but…

I think there is a point in the original article that is perhaps overstated but nonetheless mainly true - Andreessen is being hailed as one of the great entrepreneurs of our time by Wired. But really, his main skill is building companies that don't make much money and selling them to other companies. He has never really created anything of long-term value. He's no Warren Buffet or Bill Gates.
Post reply on HN