4 ms·

This is completely insane. The only possible explanation I can think of is that Neumann's shares were so ridiculously impossible to get back and he was so stub

This is completely insane. The only possible explanation I can think of is that Neumann's shares were so ridiculously impossible to get back and he was so stubborn about giving them up that SoftBank either paid this blood money or choked on WeWork running out of cash in a month. Even if that did happen, how negligent was SoftBank to get into this position in the first place? This is why the general public, and now an increasing number of politicians, are increasingly hating SV in general - the headlines are getting almost as bad as the financial bailout ones in 2009.

SmellTheGlove 7y ago
Particularly when We isn’t really a tech company and based in NYC, not SV. It’s unfortunate to have it lumped in when it’s really not representative of tech dysfunction. We have that, but it’s not this.
- skinnymuch 7y ago
  I don’t know how many people will care if a company is based in NYC vs SF/valley. It still feels in general like a SV thing if thinking of SV as its ideas and echo chamber vs just region.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - SmellTheGlove 7y ago
    I dunno, real estate grift seems more NYC than SV to me. I think ambiguity is due to We marketing itself as a tech brand, but if we look at what really happened here, it doesn’t seem SV beyond the CEOs caricature personality. Even the growth at all costs companies like Uber are driving toward sustainable unit economics. I’m not one to defend the valley - I was an outsider for the first decade and a half of my career before moving out here and into the fire. There’s a lot of stupid shit that goes on in tech, but what We did is only create the appearance of working from the same playbook. Maybe on my latter point we really are saying the same thing - I could see how an observer might relate the behaviors.
skybrian 7y ago
They put more money than they could afford to lose into a company they don't control, so now they're stuck.

SmellTheGlove 7y ago

Particularly when We isn’t really a tech company and based in NYC, not SV. It’s unfortunate to have it lumped in when it’s really not representative of tech dysfunction. We have that, but it’s not this.

skinnymuch 7y ago
I don’t know how many people will care if a company is based in NYC vs SF/valley. It still feels in general like a SV thing if thinking of SV as its ideas and echo chamber vs just region.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- SmellTheGlove 7y ago
  I dunno, real estate grift seems more NYC than SV to me. I think ambiguity is due to We marketing itself as a tech brand, but if we look at what really happened here, it doesn’t seem SV beyond the CEOs caricature personality. Even the growth at all costs companies like Uber are driving toward sustainable unit economics. I’m not one to defend the valley - I was an outsider for the first decade and a half of my career before moving out here and into the fire. There’s a lot of stupid shit that goes on in tech, but what We did is only create the appearance of working from the same playbook. Maybe on my latter point we really are saying the same thing - I could see how an observer might relate the behaviors.

skybrian 7y ago

They put more money than they could afford to lose into a company they don't control, so now they're stuck.