I think this is interpreting the story at that time two one-sidedly. At that time the dot com boom of the commercial Internet had just started. They also had v

I think this is interpreting the story at that time two one-sidedly. At that time the dot com boom of the commercial Internet had just started. They also had very good credentials - I mean, two PhDs at Stanford still is a pretty good background for investors to take you seriously. It also was about an interesting problem, which in addition looked solvable with enough brains and brawns. The storytelling itself had a big mountain as a base to jump higher form there. You can't claim the height reached was due to the storytelling as a major factor. Everything else contributed much more, the right idea, people and external conditions at the right time. There were many companies at the time that had received investor money with horrible stories from today's point of view. Some of which I could see more closely because I accidentally applied for a job (I switched jobs in 1997), to see people with a huge ego, no idea what they were doing getting a few millions for ideas that made you scratch your head. We saw how it ended at the end of the dot com boom.