3 ms·

Our take on the infamous cover in 2006: http://37signals.com/svn/archives2/dont_believe_businessweeks_bubblemath.php http://37signals.com/svn/archives2/dont_bel

Our take on the infamous cover in 2006: http://37signals.com/svn/archives2/dont_believe_businessweeks_bubblemath.php http://37signals.com/svn/archives2/dont_believe_businessweek...

bobfunk 16y ago
Sounds a bit like what you guys have been saying about Facebook recently ;)
michaelchisari 16y ago
It's good to know, in the midst of an unending hype machine around tech startups, that there are people out there who act as a solid reality-based counter-balance. My first programming job was in '97 in southern California, at the height of the dot-com bubble, and it's amazing that the industry and the associated media reports still give me déjà vu thirteen years later.
zaidf 16y ago
They are rumored to have turned down 130M acquisition. Assuming that was true, then sure he wasn't worth 60M but he would have gotten 15-30M, no? I like how you guys think and am def. more excited by revenue than the other path to riches(getting acquired due to the potential in your company as seen by the acquirer). And yet, while you may have been "right" in this case, you could have easily been "wrong". What if Digg had been acquired for 130M or 200M? What do you have to say about YouTube which was bleeding dollars until recently but seems like it will go down as one of the better acquisitions of the decade? They had very little rev; lots of investment riding; and far from profitability. And yet Google acquired them for a buncha money. May be it is not as clear cut as simply taking the revenue just as it isn't as clear cut as taking the valuation from the last round?
- staunch 16y ago
  Their recipe is simple. Claim every new major web company is bullshit. If they fail say "I told you so". If they succeed say "They were just lucky."
  - brianpan 16y ago
    That wasn't their claim, read the post.
  - spitfire 16y ago
    You know, that's a pretty good strategy. YOu'll be right a lot more than 50% of the time....
    - dkarl 16y ago
      Yeah, but you'll be right on all the stories nobody remembers and wrong on the big stories. That's why most people do it the other way around. "Never heard of these guys? You will soon!" "The world is never going to be the same!"
- jforman 16y ago
  That's a big assumption to make, considering plenty of deals break down at the last minute for one reason or another. There's a large gap between a term sheet and a final, signed contract.

Our take on the infamous cover in 2006: http://37signals.com/svn/archives2/dont_believe_businessweeks_bubblemath.php http://37signals.com/svn/archives2/dont_believe_businessweek...

bobfunk 16y ago

Sounds a bit like what you guys have been saying about Facebook recently ;)

michaelchisari 16y ago

It's good to know, in the midst of an unending hype machine around tech startups, that there are people out there who act as a solid reality-based counter-balance. My first programming job was in '97 in southern California, at the height of the dot-com bubble, and it's amazing that the industry and the associated media reports still give me déjà vu thirteen years later.

zaidf 16y ago

They are rumored to have turned down 130M acquisition. Assuming that was true, then sure he wasn't worth 60M but he would have gotten 15-30M, no? I like how you guys think and am def. more excited by revenue than the other path to riches(getting acquired due to the potential in your company as seen by the acquirer). And yet, while you may have been "right" in this case, you could have easily been "wrong". What if Digg had been acquired for 130M or 200M? What do you have to say about YouTube which was bleeding dollars until recently but seems like it will go down as one of the better acquisitions of the decade? They had very little rev; lots of investment riding; and far from profitability. And yet Google acquired them for a buncha money. May be it is not as clear cut as simply taking the revenue just as it isn't as clear cut as taking the valuation from the last round?

staunch 16y ago
Their recipe is simple. Claim every new major web company is bullshit. If they fail say "I told you so". If they succeed say "They were just lucky."
- brianpan 16y ago
  That wasn't their claim, read the post.
- spitfire 16y ago
  You know, that's a pretty good strategy. YOu'll be right a lot more than 50% of the time....
  - dkarl 16y ago
    Yeah, but you'll be right on all the stories nobody remembers and wrong on the big stories. That's why most people do it the other way around. "Never heard of these guys? You will soon!" "The world is never going to be the same!"
jforman 16y ago
That's a big assumption to make, considering plenty of deals break down at the last minute for one reason or another. There's a large gap between a term sheet and a final, signed contract.