7 ms·

>"Mark and his signature hoodie: He's actually showing investors he doesn't care that much; he's going to be him. I think that's a mark of immaturity," Wedbush

by phillmv 14y ago

>"Mark and his signature hoodie: He's actually showing investors he doesn't care that much; he's going to be him. I think that's a mark of immaturity," Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter complained to Bloomberg's Mark Milian. "I think that he has to realize he's bringing investors in as a new constituency right now, and I think he's got to show them the respect that they deserve because he's asking them for their money." Christ, what an asshole. It's a negotiation tactic, one many of us use in interviews: by flaunting social convention and dressing down, you're signaling that you have leverage. Mark is the one being wooed, and not the other way around. By whining about it in the press it just makes it sound like this fellow just isn't used to being the lowest status person in the room.

joering2 14y ago
He wasn't an asshole. Mark is 27 years old. How old is the Wall Street and banking system in this country? Its older than his parents! Bankers are evil, but if you come for money you better show them respect because they rule the game and hold most of chips. I agree with author. Fun time is over! FB needs to show profits and prove to stockholders that its worth their money. Coming in hoodie helps publicity, but that's it. It tells average Facebook yuppie "oh Mark is "selling" but hey he still is himself so everything is fine". FB and internet is still too young to figure itself out. This could be bubble. FB can go down like anything that was trendy in its time. I think buying Instagram for that much money shows how desperately scared Mark is. He was incredibly lucky that Instagram owners didnt turn out to be another Mark and say "we don't sell" and keep building momentum. My sisters that are trendoholics switched from reading "boring" (according to them) Facebook updates and messages to taking snapshots and limited wording on Insta. Trend is moving beyond FB and Mark knows it! Next time when FB wants to buy something overtaking the net, they may hear "no, thank you".
- romaniv 14y ago
  if you come for money you better show them respect Okay, so he didn't. What are they going to do? Complain about it? Anyway, ethics is about what people should do. If you switch to discussing what people can get away with because of power, you're no longer discussing ethics. If you switch back and forth, using "what X can get away with" standard for people with power and "what they should do" for everyone else, then there is something wrong with your argument.
  - jbooth 14y ago
    It's astonishing to me how much the Ayn Rand quoters on Wall St get their feelings hurt. Aren't these guys supposed to be the rational titans of industry?
    - alwold 14y ago
      I would see the wall street types more fitting into the "looter" category of Rand's philosophy. They are not directly creating anything of value, but instead skimming money from the ventures of those who do.
    - dasil003 14y ago
      Let's not lump everyone together. There will inevitably be some significant minority of people on Wall Street who came there for the respect, and it's little wonder that when they don't get that respect despite the large number of 0s they command they get butt-hurt all too easily.
- Bud 14y ago
  1. Yes, he was an asshole. And is. 2. Who cares how old Wall Street is? Does this magically make an asshole into less of an asshole, or instantly grant him credibility? I sing classical music written by dudes who have been dead for centuries; I don't see anyone lining up to give me more respect and money than bankers. Why not? Don't I automatically deserve it? 3. No, they do not "rule the game". Zuck is the guy with something of value here. Not the bankers. Did you notice which direction the money is flowing here? That tells you who has the power in this transaction.
  - joering2 14y ago
    No it doesnt make Wall St less asshole and obviously the way they handle business is usually unethical, but still one can't deny - they run the show. Zuck May not have much value if he doesn't raise the money. Wasn't that the major reason why most investors gave him the money at the first place (or any other company in that matter)? To IPO and XX-fold their investments.
    - rhizome 14y ago
      Right, because some yuppie doesn't like his style, people aren't going to invest in Facebook.
      - larrys 14y ago
        You might want to consider that that photo of Mark made every mainstream media and consider how older people who buy stocks might think of investing in facebook if they are turned off by what, to them, will seem like immaturity. There is a reason that company management of many widely held companies appears all serious and well groomed. Have you ever seen a General Electric annual report?
        rhizome 14y ago
        Yet somehow these older people are too stupid to interpret the fact that he's built Facebook? What aspect of finance relies on the sartorial choices of a company's executives?
- mseebach 14y ago
  > if you come for money you better show them respect If you "come for money", you're doing it wrong. You should come for a mutually beneficial business transaction, and that seems to be exactly what Zuckerberg is doing.
rhizome 14y ago
Great perspective, Mr. Pachter. Try underbidding and tell us how it goes.
cynicalkane 14y ago
Some people feel uncomfortable or awkward wearing formal clothes, especially if they don't wear them all that often. This would put one at a disadvantage negotiating, and it's not like he'll be kicked out of negotiations for wearing a hoodie. This is just one possible explanation, but you shouldn't assume he's being a jerk for jerkiness's sake. Also, I'm sure whoever is negotiating with him is commanding a fat paycheck and used to negotiating through situations far more difficult than a dude wearing a hoodie. Bankers tend to just like to complain. Finally, I'd be mildly surprised if you used underdressing to interviews as a successful tactic. (EDIT: underdressing means dressing lower than expected, not dressing down in general.)
- xenophanes 14y ago
  I underdressed to my programming interviews in the bay area (I generally wear what I like). I can't really say if it helped or hurt but I did fine and doubt it mattered much.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - sukuriant 14y ago
    That's the Bay Area. I doubt you could have gotten away with such an activity had you applied for a job on the East Coast, or for a large defense contractor, like Lockheed or Boeing.
    - ori_b 14y ago
      I did get away with it.
      - sukuriant 14y ago
        Performing the interview? Or getting the job?
    - misiti3780 14y ago
tomjen3 14y ago
He thinks to highly of himself but I find it fashionating why he thinks so highly of himself. He is absolutely blind to how little his money actually gets him. There is two much money (which is what happens when the FED prints money) chasing too few good investments that needs them (which is what happens when the price to run a company keeps going down). But yeah, he just cannot fathom that money are not as important and that he by proxy isn't going to be as important.
sterling312 14y ago
Regarding to the second quote, the statement just shows how the analyst doesn't get the situation at hand at all. Traditional firms uses IPO to gain cash and expand, true. That is because it is very hard to raise money in that scale using other methods. In the case of Facebook, with over $1B revenue, it can easily raise cash from other forms of investment (hey, who wouldn't want to own a piece of Facebook at this point?). Instead, what the IPO really does it introduce the pricing of Facebook to the market, which in turn hopefully reduces the volatility of the price. Who gets the most benefit out of this? The investors! Facebook is going to get cash one way or another; it is the investors who gets the most benefit out of its IPO. So Zuckerberg can do whatever he wants. The only ones he has to show respect to are the consumers that uses Facebook, frankly.
- mbesto 14y ago
  This. And we can speculate all you want, but I'm under the impression that Facebook is primarily doing an IPO, because the SEC is forcing them to do so (500 investor rule). That and well, I think some people want to get paid.
- veyron 14y ago
  Mentioned it a few times in other threads, but it clearly needs to be reiterated: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3753915 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3753915 For posterity's sake let's make this clear: the SEC rule regarding 500 owners is as follows: > Companies with more than $10 million in assets whose securities are held by more than 500 owners must file annual and other periodic reports. These reports are available to the public through the SEC's EDGAR database. Source: Securities Act of 1934, paraphrased in http://www.sec.gov/about/laws.shtml http://www.sec.gov/about/laws.shtml It requires firms to file special reports. The reason why people presume that it means that the firm must go public is simple: there are only a few additional requirements to go public, and the economic advantages in many cases outweigh the paltry effort. For posterity's sake, this is worth repeating: THERE IS NOTHING FORCING A FIRM TO GO PUBLIC. NOTHING.
  - surrealize 14y ago
    You're missing the point. Facebook might not have been "forced" to go public, but they still don't really need the cash from the IPO. And there are undoubtedly lots of bankers who would kill to be in on the facebook IPO. So the banker who expected Zuckerberg to bow and scrape was still badly mistaken. Zuckerberg isn't really "asking investors for their money" in the IPO, because he doesn't really need that money. That's the point.
idle_processor 14y ago
>by flaunting social convention and dressing down http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flouting http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flouting
- dalore 14y ago
  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flaunting http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flaunting > to treat contemptuously <flaunted the rules
  - surrealize 14y ago
    Keep on reading your linked page: > Although transitive sense 2 of flaunt undoubtedly arose from confusion with flout
SkyMarshal 14y ago
For his next meeting he should wear a Betabrand executive pinstripe hoodie and dress pant sweatpants, and really throw em for a loop. http://www.betabrand.com/executive-pinstripe-hoodie.html http://www.betabrand.com/executive-pinstripe-hoodie.html http://www.betabrand.com/favorites/gray-dress-pant-sweatpants.html http://www.betabrand.com/favorites/gray-dress-pant-sweatpant...
pbiggar 14y ago
Can you clarify who you think the asshole is? I think you're saying Pachter, but commenters below seem to think you're talking about Zuckerberg.

by phillmv 14y ago

joering2 14y ago

He wasn't an asshole. Mark is 27 years old. How old is the Wall Street and banking system in this country? Its older than his parents! Bankers are evil, but if you come for money you better show them respect because they rule the game and hold most of chips. I agree with author. Fun time is over! FB needs to show profits and prove to stockholders that its worth their money. Coming in hoodie helps publicity, but that's it. It tells average Facebook yuppie "oh Mark is "selling" but hey he still is himself so everything is fine". FB and internet is still too young to figure itself out. This could be bubble. FB can go down like anything that was trendy in its time. I think buying Instagram for that much money shows how desperately scared Mark is. He was incredibly lucky that Instagram owners didnt turn out to be another Mark and say "we don't sell" and keep building momentum. My sisters that are trendoholics switched from reading "boring" (according to them) Facebook updates and messages to taking snapshots and limited wording on Insta. Trend is moving beyond FB and Mark knows it! Next time when FB wants to buy something overtaking the net, they may hear "no, thank you".

romaniv 14y ago
if you come for money you better show them respect Okay, so he didn't. What are they going to do? Complain about it? Anyway, ethics is about what people should do. If you switch to discussing what people can get away with because of power, you're no longer discussing ethics. If you switch back and forth, using "what X can get away with" standard for people with power and "what they should do" for everyone else, then there is something wrong with your argument.
- jbooth 14y ago
  It's astonishing to me how much the Ayn Rand quoters on Wall St get their feelings hurt. Aren't these guys supposed to be the rational titans of industry?
  - alwold 14y ago
    I would see the wall street types more fitting into the "looter" category of Rand's philosophy. They are not directly creating anything of value, but instead skimming money from the ventures of those who do.
  - dasil003 14y ago
    Let's not lump everyone together. There will inevitably be some significant minority of people on Wall Street who came there for the respect, and it's little wonder that when they don't get that respect despite the large number of 0s they command they get butt-hurt all too easily.
Bud 14y ago
1. Yes, he was an asshole. And is. 2. Who cares how old Wall Street is? Does this magically make an asshole into less of an asshole, or instantly grant him credibility? I sing classical music written by dudes who have been dead for centuries; I don't see anyone lining up to give me more respect and money than bankers. Why not? Don't I automatically deserve it? 3. No, they do not "rule the game". Zuck is the guy with something of value here. Not the bankers. Did you notice which direction the money is flowing here? That tells you who has the power in this transaction.
- joering2 14y ago
  No it doesnt make Wall St less asshole and obviously the way they handle business is usually unethical, but still one can't deny - they run the show. Zuck May not have much value if he doesn't raise the money. Wasn't that the major reason why most investors gave him the money at the first place (or any other company in that matter)? To IPO and XX-fold their investments.
  - rhizome 14y ago
    Right, because some yuppie doesn't like his style, people aren't going to invest in Facebook.
    - larrys 14y ago
      You might want to consider that that photo of Mark made every mainstream media and consider how older people who buy stocks might think of investing in facebook if they are turned off by what, to them, will seem like immaturity. There is a reason that company management of many widely held companies appears all serious and well groomed. Have you ever seen a General Electric annual report?
      - rhizome 14y ago
        Yet somehow these older people are too stupid to interpret the fact that he's built Facebook? What aspect of finance relies on the sartorial choices of a company's executives?
mseebach 14y ago
> if you come for money you better show them respect If you "come for money", you're doing it wrong. You should come for a mutually beneficial business transaction, and that seems to be exactly what Zuckerberg is doing.

rhizome 14y ago

Great perspective, Mr. Pachter. Try underbidding and tell us how it goes.

cynicalkane 14y ago

Some people feel uncomfortable or awkward wearing formal clothes, especially if they don't wear them all that often. This would put one at a disadvantage negotiating, and it's not like he'll be kicked out of negotiations for wearing a hoodie. This is just one possible explanation, but you shouldn't assume he's being a jerk for jerkiness's sake. Also, I'm sure whoever is negotiating with him is commanding a fat paycheck and used to negotiating through situations far more difficult than a dude wearing a hoodie. Bankers tend to just like to complain. Finally, I'd be mildly surprised if you used underdressing to interviews as a successful tactic. (EDIT: underdressing means dressing lower than expected, not dressing down in general.)

xenophanes 14y ago
I underdressed to my programming interviews in the bay area (I generally wear what I like). I can't really say if it helped or hurt but I did fine and doubt it mattered much.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- sukuriant 14y ago
  That's the Bay Area. I doubt you could have gotten away with such an activity had you applied for a job on the East Coast, or for a large defense contractor, like Lockheed or Boeing.
  - ori_b 14y ago
    I did get away with it.
    - sukuriant 14y ago
      Performing the interview? Or getting the job?
  - misiti3780 14y ago

tomjen3 14y ago

He thinks to highly of himself but I find it fashionating why he thinks so highly of himself. He is absolutely blind to how little his money actually gets him. There is two much money (which is what happens when the FED prints money) chasing too few good investments that needs them (which is what happens when the price to run a company keeps going down). But yeah, he just cannot fathom that money are not as important and that he by proxy isn't going to be as important.

sterling312 14y ago

Regarding to the second quote, the statement just shows how the analyst doesn't get the situation at hand at all. Traditional firms uses IPO to gain cash and expand, true. That is because it is very hard to raise money in that scale using other methods. In the case of Facebook, with over $1B revenue, it can easily raise cash from other forms of investment (hey, who wouldn't want to own a piece of Facebook at this point?). Instead, what the IPO really does it introduce the pricing of Facebook to the market, which in turn hopefully reduces the volatility of the price. Who gets the most benefit out of this? The investors! Facebook is going to get cash one way or another; it is the investors who gets the most benefit out of its IPO. So Zuckerberg can do whatever he wants. The only ones he has to show respect to are the consumers that uses Facebook, frankly.

mbesto 14y ago
This. And we can speculate all you want, but I'm under the impression that Facebook is primarily doing an IPO, because the SEC is forcing them to do so (500 investor rule). That and well, I think some people want to get paid.
veyron 14y ago
Mentioned it a few times in other threads, but it clearly needs to be reiterated: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3753915 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3753915 For posterity's sake let's make this clear: the SEC rule regarding 500 owners is as follows: > Companies with more than $10 million in assets whose securities are held by more than 500 owners must file annual and other periodic reports. These reports are available to the public through the SEC's EDGAR database. Source: Securities Act of 1934, paraphrased in http://www.sec.gov/about/laws.shtml http://www.sec.gov/about/laws.shtml It requires firms to file special reports. The reason why people presume that it means that the firm must go public is simple: there are only a few additional requirements to go public, and the economic advantages in many cases outweigh the paltry effort. For posterity's sake, this is worth repeating: THERE IS NOTHING FORCING A FIRM TO GO PUBLIC. NOTHING.
- surrealize 14y ago
  You're missing the point. Facebook might not have been "forced" to go public, but they still don't really need the cash from the IPO. And there are undoubtedly lots of bankers who would kill to be in on the facebook IPO. So the banker who expected Zuckerberg to bow and scrape was still badly mistaken. Zuckerberg isn't really "asking investors for their money" in the IPO, because he doesn't really need that money. That's the point.

idle_processor 14y ago

>by flaunting social convention and dressing down http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flouting http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flouting

dalore 14y ago
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flaunting http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flaunting > to treat contemptuously <flaunted the rules
- surrealize 14y ago
  Keep on reading your linked page: > Although transitive sense 2 of flaunt undoubtedly arose from confusion with flout

SkyMarshal 14y ago

For his next meeting he should wear a Betabrand executive pinstripe hoodie and dress pant sweatpants, and really throw em for a loop. http://www.betabrand.com/executive-pinstripe-hoodie.html http://www.betabrand.com/executive-pinstripe-hoodie.html http://www.betabrand.com/favorites/gray-dress-pant-sweatpants.html http://www.betabrand.com/favorites/gray-dress-pant-sweatpant...

pbiggar 14y ago

Can you clarify who you think the asshole is? I think you're saying Pachter, but commenters below seem to think you're talking about Zuckerberg.