3 ms·

The litigation comment in there was the “ah there’s the elephant in the room” moment for me

by jack_riminton 2y ago

soneca 2y ago
Yep. I was curious about what that mitigation was about. Anyone knows?
- atto 2y ago
  I'm an LP in both Calm and the fund, SureSwift, that's suing them, so I suspect I know as much as anyone external. Weirdly, the only information I've been able to glean is from Calm, but I did participate in the events personally that are part of the litigation. The other fund, SureSwift, had some drama (founding GP left, replaced with a hired CEO who seems entirely competent), and SureSwift shortly after sued Calm and the former GP. I never got a good picture what happened internally, but there certainly was a falling out. Speaking personally, the lawsuit seems like a giant waste of time and I haven't heard anything that makes me think Calm actually did anything wrong. I've asked, and got very confusing empty responses from SureSwift. I wish I knew more, since I love this space (calm companies, micro PE, etc) and am personally invested on both sides.
  - mvdtnz 2y ago
    What's an LP?
    - swyx 2y ago
      limited partner. aka investor
- corry 2y ago
  I skimmed the suit itself [1] - apparently Calm put on some events together with a PE fund in a joint venture, then a guy left the PE fund... and Calm and the exited person continued to put on events under the same name while preventing the PE from participating. The PE then sued them since they feel entitled since they co-created the event. I'm sure there's more to the story, this is just from the suit itself (so obviously from the POV of the plaintiff). But ya, the impact of a PE lawsuit on a very small startup fund that's already trying something new/risky is going to be disastrous for their morale and future plans. No VC fund wants to be sued, I imagine, but for the one that has a razor-thin business model and no expectations of a big exit for 10+ years I imagine the suit is a high-probability death-blow regardless of right and wrong. [1] https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fauBdZ3Zm5m4VC9YQdyvDiIkllCDvG6G/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fauBdZ3Zm5m4VC9YQdyvDiIkllC...
  - Aurornis 2y ago
    > but for the one that has a razor-thin business model and no expectations of a big exit for 10+ years This is the confusing part for me. Why were they trying to run an annual event like this to begin with? It's a lot of work, and they admitted it was even running at a loss. I never understood how they squared that with their "calm" thesis.
Aurornis 2y ago
Twitter post where they explain their side: https://x.com/tylertringas/status/1716592486460629132 https://x.com/tylertringas/status/1716592486460629132 TL;DR: They were trying to run annual Founder Summit destination events with a partner fund. They cancelled the joint agreement with the partners and expressed their intent to run them alone. Partners are suing for, as I understand it, trying to "cancel" a joint business venture that was co-developed and but continue to run the co-developed venture as if the partnership never existed. To be honest, I never understood why the Calm Company Fund was trying to run annual destination Founder Summits at all. It seemed so antithetical to their thesis of funding calm, profit-focused founders.

The litigation comment in there was the “ah there’s the elephant in the room” moment for me

soneca 2y ago

Yep. I was curious about what that mitigation was about. Anyone knows?

atto 2y ago
I'm an LP in both Calm and the fund, SureSwift, that's suing them, so I suspect I know as much as anyone external. Weirdly, the only information I've been able to glean is from Calm, but I did participate in the events personally that are part of the litigation. The other fund, SureSwift, had some drama (founding GP left, replaced with a hired CEO who seems entirely competent), and SureSwift shortly after sued Calm and the former GP. I never got a good picture what happened internally, but there certainly was a falling out. Speaking personally, the lawsuit seems like a giant waste of time and I haven't heard anything that makes me think Calm actually did anything wrong. I've asked, and got very confusing empty responses from SureSwift. I wish I knew more, since I love this space (calm companies, micro PE, etc) and am personally invested on both sides.
- mvdtnz 2y ago
  What's an LP?
  - swyx 2y ago
    limited partner. aka investor
corry 2y ago
I skimmed the suit itself [1] - apparently Calm put on some events together with a PE fund in a joint venture, then a guy left the PE fund... and Calm and the exited person continued to put on events under the same name while preventing the PE from participating. The PE then sued them since they feel entitled since they co-created the event. I'm sure there's more to the story, this is just from the suit itself (so obviously from the POV of the plaintiff). But ya, the impact of a PE lawsuit on a very small startup fund that's already trying something new/risky is going to be disastrous for their morale and future plans. No VC fund wants to be sued, I imagine, but for the one that has a razor-thin business model and no expectations of a big exit for 10+ years I imagine the suit is a high-probability death-blow regardless of right and wrong. [1] https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fauBdZ3Zm5m4VC9YQdyvDiIkllCDvG6G/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fauBdZ3Zm5m4VC9YQdyvDiIkllC...
- Aurornis 2y ago
  > but for the one that has a razor-thin business model and no expectations of a big exit for 10+ years This is the confusing part for me. Why were they trying to run an annual event like this to begin with? It's a lot of work, and they admitted it was even running at a loss. I never understood how they squared that with their "calm" thesis.

Aurornis 2y ago

Twitter post where they explain their side: https://x.com/tylertringas/status/1716592486460629132 https://x.com/tylertringas/status/1716592486460629132 TL;DR: They were trying to run annual Founder Summit destination events with a partner fund. They cancelled the joint agreement with the partners and expressed their intent to run them alone. Partners are suing for, as I understand it, trying to "cancel" a joint business venture that was co-developed and but continue to run the co-developed venture as if the partnership never existed. To be honest, I never understood why the Calm Company Fund was trying to run annual destination Founder Summits at all. It seemed so antithetical to their thesis of funding calm, profit-focused founders.