3 ms·

I'm beginning to wonder if at any point they will pack their bags, return what's left to investors and close up shop...or maybe they'll just keep going until it

I'm beginning to wonder if at any point they will pack their bags, return what's left to investors and close up shop...or maybe they'll just keep going until it's completely dead? Hell maybe they pivot to be a traditional lab with traditional equipment?

ben_jones 10y ago
Theirs a few reasons at play that motivate people to NOT return the money. * Sunken cost fallacy (we can still make a come back!) * Failure is unacceptable (returning money is accepting utter failure) * Returning money means you no longer possess it or the power / reputation it yields (you will no longer get a generous salary for example) * Returning hundreds of millions of dollars with a multi-billion dollar loss is a joke to begin with
- arcticbull 10y ago
  > * Returning hundreds of millions of dollars with a multi-billion dollar loss is a joke to begin with. That's the definition of sunk cost fallacy isn't it? It's seeing yourself as someone who lost $9B not someone who has $200M :) that was a good life lesson for me personally.
ACow_Adonis 10y ago
As a general rule that will serve everyone well on hacker news throughout their lives: Don't ever expect someone who has gotten their hands on your money to voluntarily close up shop and give it back :p They'll take it to the casino and bet it all on black, or siphon it off somewhere else before that ever happens...because all your money gone and them giving it back to you is the same thing to the person who no longer has it.
- jacquesm 10y ago
  > Don't ever expect someone who has gotten their hands on your money to voluntarily close up shop and give it back :p Maybe you shouldn't expect it, but I have seen a start-up or two that failed and that did exactly that. And start-ups that fail have a whole pile of clauses triggered in the various shareholder agreements that count towards a 'liquidation event'. That's what liq-prefs are for and the immediate consequence usually is that the latest investors stand the best chance of getting some or all of their money back.
  - ACow_Adonis 10y ago
    Yep. There's always some events that restore faith in humanity and make you go "wow, I'll remember that/them, full respect/kudos". But just don't expect it...
    - jacquesm 10y ago
      I think it seriously increases your chances of getting funded with a new project later on. On the other hand, if you're scamming consumers of course it is only a very small step to scam investors (and easier to get away with).
JoeAltmaier 10y ago
Already doing that, right? They used traditional equipment while developing their new system, which never worked.
dragonwriter 10y ago
> I'm beginning to wonder if at any point they will pack their bags, return what's left to investors and close up shop... They may do so if forced by legal action; otherwise, its unlikely. If management can continue to spend other people's money pretending to try to run a viable business and paying themselves and their associates until there's nothing left to pay with, they'd probably rather do that that hand money back to investors.

ben_jones 10y ago

Theirs a few reasons at play that motivate people to NOT return the money. * Sunken cost fallacy (we can still make a come back!) * Failure is unacceptable (returning money is accepting utter failure) * Returning money means you no longer possess it or the power / reputation it yields (you will no longer get a generous salary for example) * Returning hundreds of millions of dollars with a multi-billion dollar loss is a joke to begin with

arcticbull 10y ago
> * Returning hundreds of millions of dollars with a multi-billion dollar loss is a joke to begin with. That's the definition of sunk cost fallacy isn't it? It's seeing yourself as someone who lost $9B not someone who has $200M :) that was a good life lesson for me personally.

ACow_Adonis 10y ago

As a general rule that will serve everyone well on hacker news throughout their lives: Don't ever expect someone who has gotten their hands on your money to voluntarily close up shop and give it back :p They'll take it to the casino and bet it all on black, or siphon it off somewhere else before that ever happens...because all your money gone and them giving it back to you is the same thing to the person who no longer has it.

jacquesm 10y ago
> Don't ever expect someone who has gotten their hands on your money to voluntarily close up shop and give it back :p Maybe you shouldn't expect it, but I have seen a start-up or two that failed and that did exactly that. And start-ups that fail have a whole pile of clauses triggered in the various shareholder agreements that count towards a 'liquidation event'. That's what liq-prefs are for and the immediate consequence usually is that the latest investors stand the best chance of getting some or all of their money back.
- ACow_Adonis 10y ago
  Yep. There's always some events that restore faith in humanity and make you go "wow, I'll remember that/them, full respect/kudos". But just don't expect it...
  - jacquesm 10y ago
    I think it seriously increases your chances of getting funded with a new project later on. On the other hand, if you're scamming consumers of course it is only a very small step to scam investors (and easier to get away with).

JoeAltmaier 10y ago

Already doing that, right? They used traditional equipment while developing their new system, which never worked.

dragonwriter 10y ago

> I'm beginning to wonder if at any point they will pack their bags, return what's left to investors and close up shop... They may do so if forced by legal action; otherwise, its unlikely. If management can continue to spend other people's money pretending to try to run a viable business and paying themselves and their associates until there's nothing left to pay with, they'd probably rather do that that hand money back to investors.