Twice

#1

Post by danielpal » Fri, Jan 18, 2013, 3:34 PM UTC

Twice
blog.aubrey.me

Re: Twice

#2

Post by aubreyjohnson » Fri, Jan 18, 2013, 3:59 PM UTC

The title of this is a little misleading as I don't really discuss anything about Apple acquiring Color. I just link to the rumor articles.

Re: Twice

#3

Post by speeder » Fri, Jan 18, 2013, 4:00 PM UTC

I do not understood the tale :(

Why it was genius?

Re: Twice

#4

Post by draz » Fri, Jan 18, 2013, 4:03 PM UTC

speeder wrote: post #3

I do not understood the tale :( Why it was genius?

Those employees were given options at Apple ($80M worth) that were probably lost once they left the company to work at Color. Then Apple ended up getting them back on the cheap. So instead of $160M, Apple ended up paying $80M + $7M.

Re: Twice

#5

Post by danielpal » Fri, Jan 18, 2013, 4:06 PM UTC

draz wrote: post #4

speeder wrote: post #3

I do not understood the tale :( Why it was genius?

Those employees were given options at Apple ($80M worth) that were probably lost once they left the company to work at Color. Then Apple ended up getting them back on the cheap. So instead of $160M, Apple ended up paying $80M + $7M.

Also remember the Stock has gone more than tripled. SO $80 in cash and $80 in stock that would be really worth about 200M today. Now they bought the same team again with 7M of todays priced.

Re: Twice

#6

Post by lost_name » Fri, Jan 18, 2013, 4:08 PM UTC

draz wrote: post #4

speeder wrote: post #3

I do not understood the tale :( Why it was genius?

Those employees were given options at Apple ($80M worth) that were probably lost once they left the company to work at Color. Then Apple ended up getting them back on the cheap. So instead of $160M, Apple ended up paying $80M + $7M.

Doesn't the notion of this being genius imply that Apple "let them get away" the first time because they knew they'd be able to acquire their next company for less? Or am I missing something?

Re: Twice

#7

Post by indy » Fri, Jan 18, 2013, 4:20 PM UTC

lost_name wrote: post #6

draz wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those employees were given options at Apple ($80M worth) that were probably lost once they left the company to work at Color. Then Apple ended up getting them back on the cheap. So instead of $160M, Apple ended up paying $80M + $7M.

Doesn't the notion of this being genius imply that Apple "let them get away" the first time because they knew they'd be able to acquire their next company for less? Or am I missing something?

Its a very sycophantic article that gives Apple far too much credit. No "genius" strategy was involved it was just fortunate (for Apple) that they could acquire the remnants of Color for such a low price.

Re: Twice

#8

Post by sidcool » Fri, Jan 18, 2013, 4:22 PM UTC

Why is this top link?

Re: Twice

#9

Post by rdl » Fri, Jan 18, 2013, 4:25 PM UTC

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.

Re: Twice

#10

Post by kami8845 » Fri, Jan 18, 2013, 4:28 PM UTC

indy wrote: post #7

lost_name wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't the notion of this being genius imply that Apple "let them get away" the first time because they knew they'd be able to acquire their next company for less? Or am I missing something?

Its a very sycophantic article that gives Apple far too much credit. No "genius" strategy was involved it was just fortunate (for Apple) that they could acquire the remnants of Color for such a low price.

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?