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

Don't Talk to Corp Dev

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 209 posts

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev

#151

Post by mfitzerald »

LargeCompanies wrote: post #142
crdoconnor wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please name and shame when the NDA expires. Preferably with the name of the not so nice bigwig.

At this stage and without backing/guidance from networks like YC, TechStars (tried both a few times) or big angel or VC firms we have nothing to lose in telling our story. We are technologists who have a history of creating innovation that gets noticed & or a novel idea we published in 2007 has gone onto have million of users after being copied 100 or more times. Our weak point is networking and overall connecting wi…

This sounds snarky but isn't my intent: your weak point is selling, which is different than networking or connecting with people.

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev

#152

Post by fapjacks »

robotresearcher wrote: post #117
aetherson wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expected value of a company with a 10% chance at a million dollars: $100,000 Expected value of a company with a 1% chance at a billion dollars: $10,000,000

The utility of a person's first million dollars is much more than the thousandth.

The gravity of this observation cannot be overstated. This is the key to the whole kingdom.

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev

#153

Post by dalke »

bbcbasic wrote: post #125
dalke wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The expected value estimate isn't sufficient. One should also estimate the risk of ruin more than "probably". If someone got to that point on friends and family money, and/or like Cisco using credit cards for financing, then another way to view this is 0% of bankruptcy vs. non-trivial chance of bankruptcy (including medical bankruptcy) and limited access to new seed money. Of course, if your 90% case is to have a job…

Hell yes there are lots of variables. It is a big decision. This decision in it's purest form can be seen on the game show "Deal or No Deal" where they choose between an unknown value in a box and a $ amount from the 'dealer'. Even this simplified version of the problem gets the contestant on edge and they really have to think hard about it, talk to their spouse etc.

A gameshow is a sandbox. No contestant will end up bankrupt as part of the show. The worst possible case is winning nothing. While the contestant can be out travel costs and opportunity costs, those are not part of the game itself. Therefore I don't think it really includes a risk of ruin.

Now, if the expected value were awarded at each stage, and had to be reported as taxable income, and losing the show required that the contestant pay back the money but still had to pay the taxes, than that would have a real risk of ruin.

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev

#154

Post by yourapostasy »

LargeCompanies wrote: post #145
yourapostasy wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this is normal. Turn this around, and see it from the "big wig"'s angle. They get in some guys (you) who obviously have not been around the block a few times already. More importantly, there is no attorney present and no way after the meeting to establish who said what, when, to who, in what setting. His upside to screw you nine ways to Sunday is a big bonus. Where's his downside? Simple: none. You cannot even n…

Ummm, no these two people report directly to a fairly well known name in tech. Also, what do I have to lose in naming and shaming them when we may just as well open source our work when we tell our story. I'm tired of being stepped on and not being able to get the right people behind & helping us!

The key is not the reporting chain as much as who has operational control of budgetary decision making. It far easier to find out who reports to whom than who really wields the check writing power, and how big a check they can write before they have to get someone else's approval.

Right now, you have yet to open source and still have the potential to out-compete the Big Name. That is worth potential income in the future. Big Name might be impressive, but there are any number of people here that can tell you from first-hand experience why Big does not necessarily mean You Shouldn't Compete With Them.

When you name and shame, your options narrow. You have no way to prove what happened, and you should get together with an attorney to find out how exposed you are to a lawsuit if you name and shame. And any potential future income can become entangled in litigation budgets if that happens.

With regards to "the right people", you got a ton of them right here on HN. Rare is the deal that cannot wait a few days longer, especially large deals (for the Corp. Dev. guy pulling the trigger on an acquisition/acquihire it is still a big deal, just not as potentially a life-changing one as for you). Take advantage of that latency to ping the hivemind here and find out different opinions you and your braintrust might not have considered yet.

If I blew up bridges every time I was stepped upon, then I wouldn't still be in business today. This happens in business; it's a very bloody game of inches that takes place over years and decades.

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev

#155

Post by [deleted] »

LargeCompanies wrote: post #145
yourapostasy wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this is normal. Turn this around, and see it from the "big wig"'s angle. They get in some guys (you) who obviously have not been around the block a few times already. More importantly, there is no attorney present and no way after the meeting to establish who said what, when, to who, in what setting. His upside to screw you nine ways to Sunday is a big bonus. Where's his downside? Simple: none. You cannot even n…

Ummm, no these two people report directly to a fairly well known name in tech. Also, what do I have to lose in naming and shaming them when we may just as well open source our work when we tell our story. I'm tired of being stepped on and not being able to get the right people behind & helping us!

[deleted]

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev

#156

Post by LargeCompanies »

yourapostasy wrote: post #154
LargeCompanies wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ummm, no these two people report directly to a fairly well known name in tech. Also, what do I have to lose in naming and shaming them when we may just as well open source our work when we tell our story. I'm tired of being stepped on and not being able to get the right people behind & helping us!

The key is not the reporting chain as much as who has operational control of budgetary decision making. It far easier to find out who reports to whom than who really wields the check writing power, and how big a check they can write before they have to get someone else's approval. Right now, you have yet to open source and still have the potential to out-compete the Big Name. That is worth potential income in the fut…

Thanks, but lawyers cost money and that resource is lacking for us.

We tried and tried and tried to get out to the valley and via an incubator(YC or TechStars), but all we could get to help us are local incubators. We greatly appreciate their backing, but they do not have the backgrounds/experience/networks a YC or TechStars has to thoroughly help us.

THough there are some people in this east coast town who could help us, but they do not seem receptive to. It's not like we haven't tried to connect with them, though!

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev

#157

Post by analog31 »

LargeCompanies wrote: post #147
throwawaykf05 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is unfortunately more common than many people think. I worked for a startup that had gone through something similar, though perhaps not as egregious. The patents were the only thing that (barely) saved it. As much as HN likes to hate on patents, this is a huge reason why startups should file some if you have some technology worth protecting. Most probably they won't be enough to save you anyway, but it may be be…

Yeah we filed our provisional 30 minutes prior to this meeting. It is now a patent-pending.

On a cautionary note, and while I'm not a lawyer... Any patent is at risk of invalidation, and disputes become a battle of resources. At the same time, the provisional does at least help establish your freedom to use your own invention.

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev

#158

Post by danieltillett »

mfitzerald wrote: post #151
LargeCompanies wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this stage and without backing/guidance from networks like YC, TechStars (tried both a few times) or big angel or VC firms we have nothing to lose in telling our story. We are technologists who have a history of creating innovation that gets noticed & or a novel idea we published in 2007 has gone onto have million of users after being copied 100 or more times. Our weak point is networking and overall connecting wi…

This sounds snarky but isn't my intent: your weak point is selling, which is different than networking or connecting with people.

I would say if their tech has been copied 100 times and used by millions that the problem is not sales it is monetization.

To the OP hang in there and don’t let these games get you down.

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev

#159

Post by aetherson »

robotresearcher wrote: post #117
aetherson wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expected value of a company with a 10% chance at a million dollars: $100,000 Expected value of a company with a 1% chance at a billion dollars: $10,000,000

The utility of a person's first million dollars is much more than the thousandth.

Well, yes. Is it 100x their thousandth? I don't know. Maybe!

But on the gripping hand, if you want a million dollars, don't start a start-up. If you want something with the expected value of $100,000, DEFINITELY don't start a start-up. If your goal in life is to get $1,000,000 and then you're going to be awfully happy, then for god's sake, go work at Google or Facebook or plenty of other biggish companies with good compensation. You won't get $1,000,000 all in one lump, but you'll get it, and on average, you'll get it sooner than a founder will.

Risk-adverse people should not be starting companies -- it's risky. And people who have made a solid decision to take a risky path should not bitch if their investors would also like the riskier, more profitable path.

Re: Don't Talk to Corp Dev

#160

Post by jschwartzi »

wodenokoto wrote: post #112
hyperliner wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is unrealistic. There are many startups that are worthless (product is terribly architected, teams don't get along, they cannot track their customers revenue, etc.). A company cannot be expected to offer money for something without some minimum level of due diligence. again, if you absolutely are not selling, then say that and move on.

I'd say that Corp Dev, shouldn't be looking at your company in the first place unless they have some confidence in you, and the break up fee you ask for sets the level of confidence you require for any kind of talks.

It also lets them know that they can't just bullshit you for several months while they gather confidential information about your product for their own development teams to copy later.
Post reply on HN