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

Tinder founders sue parent companies Match and IAC for at least $2B

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 144 posts

Re: Tinder founders sue parent companies Match and IAC for at least $2B

#111

Post by craftyguy »

dang wrote: post #48
craftyguy wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Civility and basic courtesy is not copyrighted, use it in your public statements. POTUS would disagree. Civility and basic courtesy are no longer popular. Such is the world we now live in. Edit: Anyone care to dispute this? I don't agree with it, but I'm also not willing to ignore it.

Please don't take HN threads on generic tangents and certainly not political ones.

My comment is directly related to the parent comment. I would hope HN moderators are not in the business of dismissing comments they do not agree with as 'generic tangents', but hey, it's your site I guess.

Re: Tinder founders sue parent companies Match and IAC for at least $2B

#113

Post by Kiro »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #2

> The suit alleges that IAC and Match Group manipulated financial data in order to create 'a fake lowball valuation' (to quote the plaintiffs’ press release), then stripped Rad, Mateen, Badeen and others of their stock options Wait, they didn't exercise their options into the sale? Did the founders hire a team of squirrels as their bankers? This is M&A 101 when switching to majority control. EDIT: Ah, Tinder was laun…

> Wait, they didn't exercise their options into the sale?

What does this mean exactly?

Re: Tinder founders sue parent companies Match and IAC for at least $2B

#114

Post by rajacombinator »

gnicholas wrote: post #56
rajacombinator wrote: post #49

If you had this obviously brilliant app idea why would you launch it as an internal project? Something about the founding story here has never added up.

Obviously brilliant in retrospect

Not really. For people that work with social networks and social dynamics it was an obvious game changer. (Not obvious to invent, obviously, but once shown, anyone who understands the space could see its brilliance.)

Re: Tinder founders sue parent companies Match and IAC for at least $2B

#115

Post by rajacombinator »

bing_dai wrote: post #54
rajacombinator wrote: post #49

If you had this obviously brilliant app idea why would you launch it as an internal project? Something about the founding story here has never added up.

There might be clauses in those Tinder founders' employment contracts with Match.com that any intellectual property that they came up with during their employment belongs to Match.com. There's a similar plot in the Silicon Valley TV show (Piped Piper v.s. Hooli).

Yea that’s one of a few plausible scenarios. However a real founder of this app would find a way around those contracts.

Re: Tinder founders sue parent companies Match and IAC for at least $2B

#116

Post by lysp »

coralreef wrote: post #32
mmanfrin wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a fairly common tactic in responding to suits, they are endeavoring to make the plaintiff's case seem silly . This is entirely intentional. You're not their target audience.

Who is their target audience?

A potential jury?

Re: Tinder founders sue parent companies Match and IAC for at least $2B

#117

Post by dang »

craftyguy wrote: post #111
dang wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't take HN threads on generic tangents and certainly not political ones.

My comment is directly related to the parent comment. I would hope HN moderators are not in the business of dismissing comments they do not agree with as 'generic tangents', but hey, it's your site I guess.

If it's only related via something generic then it's a generic tangent.

FWIW: when you deal with the quantity of this stuff that we do, "agree with" doesn't enter into it. It's not even in the same solar system. No one could sustain the cognitive load of having to agree or disagree with that many things.

Re: Tinder founders sue parent companies Match and IAC for at least $2B

#118

Post by dang »

Bjartr wrote: post #91
dang wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't take HN threads on generic tangents and certainly not political ones.

Some of the best HN has to offer in terms of interesting and thought provoking discussion is on generic tangents, and so long as the discussion remains civil and contained to those threads concerning it I see no reason to discourage it for being discussed.

I know how unsatisfying this is going to sound, but: this is a point on which we just have to pull rank. It's our job to foster the kind of site where signal/noise ratio doesn't completely suck, and many years of experience have taught us that generic tangents lead to low-quality discussions that grow like weeds.

Re: Tinder founders sue parent companies Match and IAC for at least $2B

#119

Post by ececconi »

bogomipz wrote: post #105
josephpmay wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To target a different demographic. Because of the stigma associated with Match.com

Out of curiosity was is the stigma associated with Match?

You’re going to be matched with the person you married. Tinder is a little thing that that’s not even a flame... much more casual. Less commitment. More swipes.

Re: Tinder founders sue parent companies Match and IAC for at least $2B

#120

Post by Retra »

mandeepj wrote: post #67

using their domain terminology, just for fun - Match, Tinder and Bumble are in a weird relationship. Match tried to make an inappropriate pass atTinder, but she is not interested, so considers it as a sexual harassment. Same goes for Bumble. This is a relationship 101. If they can't settle internally then they should leave this dating business :-)

Unsurprisingly, if you start treating a personal relationship like a legal agreement, you'll probably suffer the situation just as badly as if you treat a legal agreement like a personal relationship. They're entirely different creatures. There's no "relationship 101" that covers them both.
Post reply on HN