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

Purism is seeking investment from individuals

puri.sm

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 74 posts

Re: Purism is seeking investment from individuals

#51

Post by toadroad »

mmastrac wrote: post #47
stu2b50 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean this is a terrible investment no matter what. 3% interest that, let's be honest, there's serious doubt as to whether you'll actually see? From an investment standpoint it's the lowest of junk bonds without a particularly high interest rate either. There's a million things with both better upside and safety.

Nobody invests in convertible notes for the interest. YC's SAFE is basically a note sans interest. Investors looking for high interest rates on notes should be a red flag to startups as well.

There's no valuation cap on this note (until a >50M round happens). It is a variation of the standard YC deal, but on some of the worst terms for an investor.(there's no pro rata, preferred liquidation either).

The only benefit for this early investment is the 8% discount. It doesn't feel like a fair trade for the added risk of investing earlier.

All that said, it's nice to be able to have the outside possibility of future return for a donation that supports their mission.

Re: Purism is seeking investment from individuals

#53

Post by ac29 »

hereforphone wrote: post #18
stevehawk wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they need you to sit back and go "damn what a bummer" when your investment nets you a $1000 loss, instead of it being something that would want you to sue.

That happens to me all the time in the stock market and I don't have close to 1MM

You take 100% losses "all the time"? That's the risk being discussed, not taking a $1000 loss on a $50,000 investment.

Re: Purism is seeking investment from individuals

#54

Post by ac29 »

myself248 wrote: post #33
asah wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Multi decade angel investor here: accredited investor requirements are completely normal, including the good faith clause.

So I don't make a billion bucks a year, but I'd be completely comfortable throwing a few grand at Purism. If I check the "yeah I'm cool" box even though the SEC wouldn't think I'm cool, am I just forfeiting some sort of recourse if Purism flops and I lose my money? Or am I opening myself up to getting in serious trouble? (Likewise, I want to invest in Aptera but I don't know anything about this. I feel like the main…

I'm not sure HN is an appropriate place to ask for advice on committing crimes.

Re: Purism is seeking investment from individuals

#55

Post by jccooper »

andreareina wrote: post #2

They require that you're an accredited investor, but later note "This is a good faith requirement, since there is no way for Purism to validate your accredited investor status". Yikes. This had to go through legal right? I'm gobsmacked that either they or the SEC think that not checking is fine. What happens if Joe Sixpack buys in?

Self-certification is normal for 506(b) activities (private offerings), but some level of verification is needed for 506(c) ("crowdfunding"). It smells like a 506(c) but they're claiming it's a "friends and family" offering. If it is, then they can do self-certification. I'll presume they have some good reason to believe they can do it this way.

Re: Purism is seeking investment from individuals

#56

Post by fsflover »

fmajid wrote: post #28
telendram wrote: post #9

Why does it sound so much like a scam ?

Before anyone considers putting money there, they should read this interview by their former CTO. Sounds like a train wreck to me: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Zlatan-T...

This is very outdated, with predictions not turned out to be correct. For instance, the most freedom-respecting smartphone on the market has been built.

Re: Purism is seeking investment from individuals

#58

Post by [deleted] »

myself248 wrote: post #33
asah wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Multi decade angel investor here: accredited investor requirements are completely normal, including the good faith clause.

So I don't make a billion bucks a year, but I'd be completely comfortable throwing a few grand at Purism. If I check the "yeah I'm cool" box even though the SEC wouldn't think I'm cool, am I just forfeiting some sort of recourse if Purism flops and I lose my money? Or am I opening myself up to getting in serious trouble? (Likewise, I want to invest in Aptera but I don't know anything about this. I feel like the main…

[deleted]

Re: Purism is seeking investment from individuals

#59

Post by dogmatism »

YetAnotherNick wrote: post #48
StuntPope wrote: post #20

I'm still waiting for my Librem phone that I pre-ordered and paid for, over four years ago. So, no, I think I'll pass.

And you haven't received refund?

I ordered and paid right at the beginning, and asked for refund about 6 months ago. Still haven't got refund. I consider it a post-tax donation at this point.

Re: Purism is seeking investment from individuals

#60

Post by dogma1138 »

ianai wrote: post #37
fmajid wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before anyone considers putting money there, they should read this interview by their former CTO. Sounds like a train wreck to me: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Zlatan-T...

Reading that, I wonder whether a start up would have a better time offering OS/firmware support for already shipping, mass produced devices. i.e. Buy the latest XPS 15 and get to work making an installer that disables all the things they want to disable (intel ME off the top of mind). Doing similar with phone models, etc. I wonder whether this could be done for Windows drivers, for that matter.

That’s what Purism does already, they are selling bog standard OEM laptops and now “NUCs” with Coreboot at a pretty high premium.

Unlike System76 they aren’t even maintaining a swanky Linux distro like PopOS.

Post reply on HN