3 ms·
There are several stacked catch 22s here. 1. Often the giants don’t pursue a space until a startup proves it’s viable - in that case you have to start somethin
by dzink 4y ago
There are several stacked catch 22s here.
1. Often the giants don’t pursue a space until a startup proves it’s viable - in that case you have to start something to make it happen.
2. Even internally there is a lot of competition at the giants for prime real estate and promo space on the apps to feature existing or new internal projects. The more types of projects the business launches, the more it has to kill because the mobile screen won’t grow any bigger. So there is a limit on how many acquired companies will actually keep living. If the team is any good, they are also pulled in other directions. For every github and instagram there are many more dead ends and even more so acquisitions of data.
It makes you wonder: what if in addition to privacy policy and terms documents, each online property has an acquisition terms statement. That would state for users and future acquirers see what is up for grabs if the startup is ever acquired (would product keep operating as part of the deal, would data be erased, would software be open sourced, would users/employees get some kind of a distribution, etc.)
- daniel-cussen 4y agoIn terms of acquisition statements, music labels I read do 5 year contracts, with all contracts renegotiated upon acquisition. Says it all, that's why YC says don't do a music startup. Just don't.
- Apocryphon 4y ago> All the while, Martino’s ultimate warning—that they might someday regret actually getting the money they wanted—would still hang over these two young men, inherent to a system designed to turn strivers into subcontractors. Instead of what you want to build—the consumer-facing, world-remaking thing—almost invariably you are pushed to build a small piece of technology that somebody with a lot of money wants built cheaply. As the engineer and writer Alex Payne put it, these startups represent “the field offices of a large distributed workforce assembled by venture capitalists and their associate institutions,” doing low-overhead, low-risk R&D for five corporate giants. In such a system, the real disillusionment isn’t the discovery that you’re unlikely to become a billionaire; it’s the realization that your feeling of autonomy is a fantasy, and that the vast majority of you have been set up to fail by design. > They ran an experiment. None of their lives have been ruined.” He knew they’d get good jobs, even if it meant the life of a project manager at Yahoo. “And none of their investors’ lives have been ruined either. When they close up shop, their investors will say, ‘That’s one more off the books. I don’t need to help them anymore. I get my time back.’” No Exit: Struggling to Survive a Modern Gold Rush by Gideon Lewis-Kraus https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7643902 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7643902
- salawat 4y agoHoly shit. That about crystalizes my sense of existential ennui at the moment. On the one hand... It works. On the other hand, Christ, if that's all it boils down to... Dear God, what have we built?
- Apocryphon 4y agoIt's funny because No Exit, and that article which is the abridged version of it, was published eight years ago. The industry has been in this steady-state for a while until COVID hyperinflation upended everything. https://slate.com/business/2014/05/no-exit-by-gideon-lewis-kraus-are-tech-startups-for-suckers.html https://slate.com/business/2014/05/no-exit-by-gideon-lewis-k...
- barry-cotter 4y ago> Dear God, what have we built? An industry where people can get rich making something useful enough people want to buy it. It’s no less honorable or meaningful than any other way of doing that, like an insurance agent, wedding planner, toy manufacturer or sporting goods store and a lot better than being in a zero sum prestige racket.