3 ms·

> You're not going to acquire the agency if the app takes off... you already own the IP. Well I think you're discounting the value of their domain knowledge an

> You're not going to acquire the agency if the app takes off... you already own the IP. Well I think you're discounting the value of their domain knowledge and their contribution vastly too much. It will take time and resources to bring a new team online. Often times, that time is greater than the business can allow. The cost of simply acquiring the company isn't going to be sufficiently high enough for the corp to even worry. As you said, they (Twitter) own the IP.

morgante 11y ago
I think you're significantly downplaying the cost which could potentially come from acquiring an agency. It would be quite different if this was done by a startup whose sole or primary purpose was making a Twitter app. But an agency has dozens of different projects and clients (up to hundreds) and most of their team probably wasn't even involved in the Twitter app. If Twitter wants to refocus on Mac, they'll just hire a Mac developer or two and pay the agency to train them on the app.
- rubyn00bie 11y ago
  I just don't think a company the size of Twitter would worry about a $5-$15 million expenditure to get access to the talent they want/need right then. Then have the rest of the company, which I am assuming (quite ignorantly) isn't that many people, finish out the rest of their contracts before giving 'em some golden handcuffs. I could definitely be wrong, and perhaps the app just doesn't require that level of expertise. If you have any data, I'd be happy to look at it-- knowledge is power.
  - morgante 11y ago
    > I could definitely be wrong, and perhaps the app just doesn't require that level of expertise. There are three categories of expertise required for this app: 1. Expertise with the Twitter "domain." Twitter obviously already has this more than any outside consultant. 2. Expertise with writing Mac apps. Twitter can easily hire for this if they need to spin up in the future. 3. Expertise at the intersection of the two, which is pretty minimal. At the end of the day, it's a pretty simple CRUD app. It's definitely not worth paying $5M to get the developer who made it, especially when you consider that Twitter probably provided most of the product direction. > I just don't think a company the size of Twitter would worry about a $5-$15 million expenditure to get access to the talent they want/need right then. First off, I suspect an acquisition of a successful studio like Black Pixel might be well out of that range. They have their own products, including NetNewsWire, as well as a healthy client roster. According to LinkedIn, they have 50-200 employees. Not a trivial or cost effective acquisition. [0] > I could definitely be wrong, and perhaps the app just doesn't require that level of expertise. I don't have the data on hand, but I'm sure you could find it in Crunchbase. In general, it's rare to see established design studios being bought by their clients. [0] https://www.linkedin.com/company/black-pixel?trk=extra_biz_viewers_viewed https://www.linkedin.com/company/black-pixel?trk=extra_biz_v...

morgante 11y ago

I think you're significantly downplaying the cost which could potentially come from acquiring an agency. It would be quite different if this was done by a startup whose sole or primary purpose was making a Twitter app. But an agency has dozens of different projects and clients (up to hundreds) and most of their team probably wasn't even involved in the Twitter app. If Twitter wants to refocus on Mac, they'll just hire a Mac developer or two and pay the agency to train them on the app.

rubyn00bie 11y ago
I just don't think a company the size of Twitter would worry about a $5-$15 million expenditure to get access to the talent they want/need right then. Then have the rest of the company, which I am assuming (quite ignorantly) isn't that many people, finish out the rest of their contracts before giving 'em some golden handcuffs. I could definitely be wrong, and perhaps the app just doesn't require that level of expertise. If you have any data, I'd be happy to look at it-- knowledge is power.
- morgante 11y ago
  > I could definitely be wrong, and perhaps the app just doesn't require that level of expertise. There are three categories of expertise required for this app: 1. Expertise with the Twitter "domain." Twitter obviously already has this more than any outside consultant. 2. Expertise with writing Mac apps. Twitter can easily hire for this if they need to spin up in the future. 3. Expertise at the intersection of the two, which is pretty minimal. At the end of the day, it's a pretty simple CRUD app. It's definitely not worth paying $5M to get the developer who made it, especially when you consider that Twitter probably provided most of the product direction. > I just don't think a company the size of Twitter would worry about a $5-$15 million expenditure to get access to the talent they want/need right then. First off, I suspect an acquisition of a successful studio like Black Pixel might be well out of that range. They have their own products, including NetNewsWire, as well as a healthy client roster. According to LinkedIn, they have 50-200 employees. Not a trivial or cost effective acquisition. [0] > I could definitely be wrong, and perhaps the app just doesn't require that level of expertise. I don't have the data on hand, but I'm sure you could find it in Crunchbase. In general, it's rare to see established design studios being bought by their clients. [0] https://www.linkedin.com/company/black-pixel?trk=extra_biz_viewers_viewed https://www.linkedin.com/company/black-pixel?trk=extra_biz_v...