that's a non-sequitir. the original parent was talking technical talent (or lack thereof), not ability to build/flip a website. the parent is disputing whether

that's a non-sequitir. the original parent was talking technical talent (or lack thereof), not ability to build/flip a website. the parent is disputing whether the acquisition for "the talent" in this case makes sense: your rebuttal here seems to be circular "6a acquired pownce because pownce founders are talented. pownce founders are talented, because they made something that got acquired by 6a".