3 ms·
The problem was assuming anybody, much less Silicon Valley, would be breaking the narrative of banks being honest institutions.
by JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
The problem was assuming anybody, much less Silicon Valley, would be breaking the narrative of banks being honest institutions.
- tadfisher 6y agoGood thing we were never in Silicon Valley :)
- agentdrtran 6y agoIt's an attitude, not a place
- zepto 6y agoThey really executed well on the promise up until the acquisition, which was why the change was so obvious and jarring. I very much appreciated the straight talk at every level from their corporate communications to their support agents. I don’t think it’s fair to be cynical about them in a more general sense. It’s just a classic problem with the model of acquisitions, and a misaligned new CEO.
- JMTQp8lwXL 6y agoYou can't exclude the exit and say "oh, they changed the narrative". Because the exit is the whole point of embarking on making the business in the first place. At least in other areas -- like say, solar energy or battery charging, the startup would have be left us with something had a tangible mark on society. Here, I don't see any of that. No lasting impact. No changed narrative.
- zepto 6y ago‘You can't exclude the exit and say "oh, they changed the narrative". Because the exit is the whole point of embarking on making the business in the first place.’ I agree that this is essentially a failure. However, for many years they provided exactly the service they said they were going to provide. As for ‘the exit is the point’. Maybe for those who controlled the stock, but definitely not for everyone involved. And even for the founders, do you think this was the exit they planned on? I very much doubt that. The end result is a bad one, but I don’t think you’ve made a case for being cynical in some broader sense.