3 ms·

> I replied, “I don’t think our investors would accept this.” (We’d been hoping to raise new money at a $150M valuation, and had floated this to potential new i

> I replied, “I don’t think our investors would accept this.” (We’d been hoping to raise new money at a $150M valuation, and had floated this to potential new investors. There’d been some interest, though no serious takers.) > And then, my terrible mistake, a moment that I’ve regretted ever since: “Actually, I know we’re worth three times as much.” /14 I don't see how it's reasonable at all to pounce on this as a lie if you mean it in the sense of having a strong belief and say this when asked to clarify.

traceroute66 5y ago
> I don't see how it's reasonable at all to pounce on this as a lie if you mean it in the sense of having a strong belief and say this when asked to clarify. Did you read the entire Twitter thread ? Higher up in the thread the guy said that Steve asked him > “how much is your revenue?” And also, “what was your last financing valuation?” To which the guy gave him the answers. For the guy to then go back and arrogantly say “Actually, I know we’re worth three times as much.” I would call that a lie, wouldn't you ? He only just gave Steve the hard numbers a few minutes before, and now he's claiming he "knows" they are worth more ? I'm afraid I'm on Steve's side on this one, i.e. "Don't waste my time and I won't waste yours". Business negotiations should always take place around hard facts and figures. If you start to try to introduce fluffy subjective nonsense that you cannot back up with facts into the discussion, like this guy did, you'll most likely be shown to the nearest door.
- seanwilson 5y ago
  > If you start to try to introduce fluffy subjective nonsense that you cannot back up with facts into the discussion I get that, but labelling someone a liar is much stronger than this.
  - traceroute66 5y ago
    I guess we could talk till the cows come home about interpretations of English language and things that get said in the heat of the moment. Ultimately in this story I think the crux lies in the guy's failure to take the "work out the details with Eddy" hint. That was the real point of no return, everything else after that was just a case of when, not if, the things would fall apart. Eddy (or the Eddy like character in other scenarios) is the guy who has more time for you than the CEO and is likely more willing to give you more rope to hang yourself in terms of exploring things like valuation boundaries. By seeking to go above the Eddy in the room and negotiate "right there" with the CEO in the room you are only opening yourself up to being eaten for breakfast. The CEO has a million things on their mind and likely doesn't have the time or mental capacity for the details. By openly seeking to go above the Eddy in the room, you are openly both stepping on Eddy's toes and potentially sending a message to the CEO that you don't trust the Eddy. Thinking you can close an M&A deal then and there with the CEO just like you would sell a widget is a bit arrogant and naïve.
    - mnl 5y ago
      Exactly, it could have happened anywhere but this is Jobs in 2008. If he's bought you already, leaving the details to Eddy, and you basically announce that Eddy won't cut it you're asking for a reality check right there. Then it's this if in a hole, stop digging.
- oh_hello 5y ago
  There is also an interesting omission in this exchange. Steve asks for revenue and last valuation, but gets back number of users and last valuation. It appears the author dodged a direct and critical question in this exchange. Steve almost certainly caught this, but still gave a clear and direct answer. Additionally, Steve said Eddy Cue would be responsible for working out the details, but the author chose to press Steve to stay and talk money. It doesn't seem crazy that Steve was annoyed with the author by the time the "I know" statement was made.
iSnow 5y ago
It's narrated looking back years, so probably the conversation had been slightly different. I agree that pouncing like that on "know" vs. "believe" seems over the top. But he probably used some different way to express himself. Maybe he even told Jobs that they had a better offer but was obviously bullshitting. With that much shame involved, some ego-protection would be expected.
hasmanean 5y ago
Not enough has been said about the line “I don’t think our investors would accept this.” 50 million. He just asked Steve jobs to hand over some large fraction of 100 million to his investors. Steve was a product guy. This guy just showed he cared more about his rent-seekers-on-capital than the real creators. That’s a fundamental disconnect.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
stagger87 5y ago
In a follow up tweet, he admitted that he was pretending to have an offer for 150M in that exchange, so yea, he was lying.

traceroute66 5y ago

> I don't see how it's reasonable at all to pounce on this as a lie if you mean it in the sense of having a strong belief and say this when asked to clarify. Did you read the entire Twitter thread ? Higher up in the thread the guy said that Steve asked him > “how much is your revenue?” And also, “what was your last financing valuation?” To which the guy gave him the answers. For the guy to then go back and arrogantly say “Actually, I know we’re worth three times as much.” I would call that a lie, wouldn't you ? He only just gave Steve the hard numbers a few minutes before, and now he's claiming he "knows" they are worth more ? I'm afraid I'm on Steve's side on this one, i.e. "Don't waste my time and I won't waste yours". Business negotiations should always take place around hard facts and figures. If you start to try to introduce fluffy subjective nonsense that you cannot back up with facts into the discussion, like this guy did, you'll most likely be shown to the nearest door.

seanwilson 5y ago
> If you start to try to introduce fluffy subjective nonsense that you cannot back up with facts into the discussion I get that, but labelling someone a liar is much stronger than this.
- traceroute66 5y ago
  I guess we could talk till the cows come home about interpretations of English language and things that get said in the heat of the moment. Ultimately in this story I think the crux lies in the guy's failure to take the "work out the details with Eddy" hint. That was the real point of no return, everything else after that was just a case of when, not if, the things would fall apart. Eddy (or the Eddy like character in other scenarios) is the guy who has more time for you than the CEO and is likely more willing to give you more rope to hang yourself in terms of exploring things like valuation boundaries. By seeking to go above the Eddy in the room and negotiate "right there" with the CEO in the room you are only opening yourself up to being eaten for breakfast. The CEO has a million things on their mind and likely doesn't have the time or mental capacity for the details. By openly seeking to go above the Eddy in the room, you are openly both stepping on Eddy's toes and potentially sending a message to the CEO that you don't trust the Eddy. Thinking you can close an M&A deal then and there with the CEO just like you would sell a widget is a bit arrogant and naïve.
  - mnl 5y ago
    Exactly, it could have happened anywhere but this is Jobs in 2008. If he's bought you already, leaving the details to Eddy, and you basically announce that Eddy won't cut it you're asking for a reality check right there. Then it's this if in a hole, stop digging.
oh_hello 5y ago
There is also an interesting omission in this exchange. Steve asks for revenue and last valuation, but gets back number of users and last valuation. It appears the author dodged a direct and critical question in this exchange. Steve almost certainly caught this, but still gave a clear and direct answer. Additionally, Steve said Eddy Cue would be responsible for working out the details, but the author chose to press Steve to stay and talk money. It doesn't seem crazy that Steve was annoyed with the author by the time the "I know" statement was made.

iSnow 5y ago

It's narrated looking back years, so probably the conversation had been slightly different. I agree that pouncing like that on "know" vs. "believe" seems over the top. But he probably used some different way to express himself. Maybe he even told Jobs that they had a better offer but was obviously bullshitting. With that much shame involved, some ego-protection would be expected.

hasmanean 5y ago

Not enough has been said about the line “I don’t think our investors would accept this.” 50 million. He just asked Steve jobs to hand over some large fraction of 100 million to his investors. Steve was a product guy. This guy just showed he cared more about his rent-seekers-on-capital than the real creators. That’s a fundamental disconnect.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

stagger87 5y ago

In a follow up tweet, he admitted that he was pretending to have an offer for 150M in that exchange, so yea, he was lying.