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

Twice

blog.aubrey.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 62 posts

Re: Twice

#51

Post by rdl »

lmm wrote: post #20
rdl wrote: post #9

The genius here was Bill Nguyen turning a failing company and a pittance $11mm offer from one failing company (Nokia) into an $80-160mm buyout from a real company (Apple), essentially though hustle alone. But it's zero-sum genius. I can respect him for being good at playing a specific game, but it's not a game I want to play myself.

I struggle to even respect it. He ripped them off; the world would be better off without his "hustle".

What he did wasn't wrong. It was just exploiting a hugely inefficient market. I think engineers would rather build stuff and make things more efficient when they see something like that -- salespeople would like to exploit it (and in the process make the market more efficient). It is more an aesthetic choice than anything else.

Re: Twice

#52

Post by 6ren »

thisishugo wrote: post #48
mikeryan wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He ripped nobody off, he sold a company in the exact way you're supposed to sell a company or for that matter the exact way you sell anything with a limited supply. Heck thats how you sell a house. Step 1. Find interested parties, Step 2. Get Bids. Step 3. Allow other interested parties to counter. Thats it there's no scam here. Its not even genius its company selling 101. Everyone involved had the opportunity to do…

In my mind what you call "company selling 101" is just a legal, high level form of profiteering.

It's an auction. Profiteering (price gouging) applies to commodities, which already have a market price.

Not even really zero-sum, because selling it to the person valuing it the most (to whom it is most useful) does create value.

But it's not as satisfying as making something that never existed before.

Re: Twice

#53

Post by ucee054 »

6ren wrote: post #52
thisishugo wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my mind what you call "company selling 101" is just a legal, high level form of profiteering.

It's an auction. Profiteering (price gouging) applies to commodities, which already have a market price. Not even really zero-sum, because selling it to the person valuing it the most (to whom it is most useful) does create value. But it's not as satisfying as making something that never existed before.

commodities, which already have a market price

Balls. Go to a commodity exchange and you know how you find the price? The last price paid at auction.

Sometimes the negotiation is disguised, using an order book or dealer system.

But sometimes they even explicitly run a call auction.

All Wall Street is is a continuous auction house.

All Supply/Demand is is a continuous auction.

Re: Twice

#54

Post by jaggederest »

zaidf wrote: post #31

Google was worried, they moved fast. This is what I'm unsure about: how much of google's worries was a result of Lala being a worthwhile company and how much of it was a result of Bill's propping it up? Let's remove Bill for a minute. Let's say Mr. No-name-CEO reaches out to his contact at Google and presents the deal for Lala. My gut would be that Google guy would likely simply pass on the deal because he doesn't pe…

Mr. Nguyen appears to be a hotshot startup salesman. Much like the proverbial car salesman, he can pump up something, sell it to a sucker, and pocket the commission.

Re: Twice

#55

Post by huytoan_pc »

Fascinating story but how is Apple genius here? Was it Apple's all along to acquire Lala, let Lala's engineers go before they exercised their options, somehow made Color a failure, then bought the all the engineers back on the cheap? The real genius (or at least real good biz person) in this story is Bill Nguyen, Apple just did what makes sense for them, it just happens that two of their acquisitions are Bill's companies.

Re: Twice

#56

Post by damian2000 »

lmm wrote: post #20
rdl wrote: post #9

The genius here was Bill Nguyen turning a failing company and a pittance $11mm offer from one failing company (Nokia) into an $80-160mm buyout from a real company (Apple), essentially though hustle alone. But it's zero-sum genius. I can respect him for being good at playing a specific game, but it's not a game I want to play myself.

I struggle to even respect it. He ripped them off; the world would be better off without his "hustle".

Sales 101 - the price is whatever someone is willing to pay for it at one point in time ... no more, no less. Selling real estate is exactly the same.

Re: Twice

#57

Post by chris_wot »

jacoblyles wrote: post #37
rdl wrote: post #9

The genius here was Bill Nguyen turning a failing company and a pittance $11mm offer from one failing company (Nokia) into an $80-160mm buyout from a real company (Apple), essentially though hustle alone. But it's zero-sum genius. I can respect him for being good at playing a specific game, but it's not a game I want to play myself.

This is how business people get paid the big bucks. All your startup's engineering work = $11 million A month of CEO hustling = $149 million

And thus the shakey underpinnings of a marketplace that overvalues certain companies come about.

Re: Twice

#58

Post by [deleted] »

thisishugo wrote: post #48
mikeryan wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He ripped nobody off, he sold a company in the exact way you're supposed to sell a company or for that matter the exact way you sell anything with a limited supply. Heck thats how you sell a house. Step 1. Find interested parties, Step 2. Get Bids. Step 3. Allow other interested parties to counter. Thats it there's no scam here. Its not even genius its company selling 101. Everyone involved had the opportunity to do…

In my mind what you call "company selling 101" is just a legal, high level form of profiteering.

[deleted]

Re: Twice

#59

Post by Gigablah »

indy wrote: post #14
kami8845 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand. They bought Lala. The sought-after employees left even after being offered a $80M golden leash. They were bought again with Color. What stops these employees from leaving again, with a much less lucrative golden leash this time around?

Nothing stops them from leaving again. My previous comment was just taking issue with the article describing the move as "genius"

Seems to be a common trend with pro-Apple articles. Earlier I read one that credited Metro-style design to Retina displays.

Re: Twice

#60

Post by rokhayakebe »

gatsby wrote: post #28

Fascinating story. Fast Company did a piece on Bill Nguyen about 18 months ago: ( http://www.fastcompany.com/1784823/bill-nguyen-boy-bubble ) and included an infographic on his track record: http://infographics.fastcompany.com/magazine/160/bill-nguyen... For a bunch of companies that have widely been considered failures in terms of product and number of users, he has had some unbelievable exits and financial successe…

Keep in mind most acquisitions for product integration kinda fail, well at least most of the acquisitions I hear off. The company I work for is small printing co, they made a small acquisition (sub $2M or $3M)a few years back, I doubt they got more than $500k in revenue from it.
Post reply on HN