3 ms·
Why would Apple feel that it's necessary to keep the investors happy? It's not Apple's fault that Color's board is unable/unwilling to attempt to keep their em
by cube13 14y ago
Why would Apple feel that it's necessary to keep the investors happy? It's not Apple's fault that Color's board is unable/unwilling to attempt to keep their employees. California's an at-will employment state, remember. Non-compete clauses have also been ruled unenforceable, so that doesn't apply either.
Seriously, this is such a small amount of money for an entire team that I sincerely doubt that anyone on Color's board was involved. If Sequoia was involved at all, I would expect to see a lot more money changing hands(probably somewhere to the tune of $50 million to cover the investors), and the IP moved to Apple. None of that is happening, so it makes more sense that the board and the investors were not involved in the deal at all.
- diego 14y agoYour comment suggests that you are not very familiar with the nuances of Merger and Acquisition processes. As someone who has been involved in a significant number of M/A deals in different capacities, I can tell you that your speculation is uninformed. I won't comment further.
- jusben1369 14y agoI think you're essentially saying Apple pays $5 million or so to have the first right to go through the 20 person development team? From there they can make any type of offer to anyone they like or not?
- cube13 14y agoI'm arguing that this isn't a merger or an acquisition. The numbers don't add up for either a merger, a full-on acquisition, or an aqui-hire. It's simply too low to fend off the investors. This sounds, very strongly, more like Apple has decided to hire all of them, and is paying them the money either as a salary or as a signing bonus.