3 ms·

I love how they always make it sound like this is by choice. "VoidZero is joining Cloudflare" As if they chose to do that. Yes, they agreed to it, but in the

by Ajunne 4mo ago

I love how they always make it sound like this is by choice. "VoidZero is joining Cloudflare" As if they chose to do that. Yes, they agreed to it, but in the end it was just a huge financial transaction. But i guess "Cloudflare buys VoidZero" just sounds less friendly. Even though that is exactly what happened.

nkohari 4mo ago
It is by choice, though? VoidZero was well-capitalized and could easily have continued to raise money for the foreseeable.
- fredoliveira 4mo ago
  Could they? Under what business model? Maybe the numbers for the paid products just weren't there and they see this exit as a positive for the team?
  - nkohari 4mo ago
    It's an obvious partnership because Void Cloud was built on Cloudflare anyway, so having Cloudflare buying them directly just means that both companies don't need to carve out their own margin. Cloudflare is also happy to fund the work on Vite, Oxc, et al. while also having a more direct answer for Vercel and Next.js. With all that said, I don't think we can extrapolate that their business wasn't doing well or that they couldn't have raised more money. Cloudflare probably just offered a good enough deal that it didn't make sense to try to grind it out. What I really mean is that when M&A happens, it seems like a lot of people think the acquirer is the only one with any agency, and that's not true at all.
Aurornis 4mo ago
> As if they chose to do that. Yes, they agreed to it, That is the definition of making a choice. This is some incredible mental backflipping to suggest that their choice wasn’t their choice.
- CapsAdmin 4mo ago
  Just to steelman the GP; some people in the company made a choice while the rest had no say. I personally think the owners should get to decide, but it's an interesting duality. (assuming it's not like everyone has a share or something, in which case they would've all had to agree I guess)
  - pjmlp 4mo ago
    That is what being employed means, otherwise own the business.
  - Aurornis 4mo ago
    > I personally think the owners should get to decide, but it's an interesting duality. The owners of a business get to decide what to do with their business. > (assuming it's not like everyone has a share or something, in which case they would've all had to agree I guess) Unanimous agreement among shareholders is not necessary to sell a company. The employees might have had some shares in the company, but not all share classes have equal voting rights. It’s also unlikely that employees in aggregate would have had enough shares to override everyone else anyway. Once shares are split among investors, founders, and employees the individual ownership of any one person or group becomes small. I wouldn’t assume that the employees wanted to avoid acquisition. They likely benefited significantly from their shares being acquired and their new compensation packages. Imagining that the employees resisted this is projecting some other story on to them
  - weird-eye-issue 4mo ago
    > I personally think the owners should get to decide Wow. Bold opinion. The owners of a company get to decide what to do with it?
  - hobofan 4mo ago
    If you join an company with next to no monetizable business model like this, you already have made your choice that you are fine with acquisition when you joined, or have deferred your choice to make a stay/leave decision until the acquisition.
esskay 4mo ago
> Evan and the rest of the VoidZero team continue to lead Vite, Vitest, Rolldown, Oxc, and Vite+. Explain how thats not a clear indication of this being a choice and something they agreed to.
TheAlexLichter 4mo ago
1) The blog post mentions "acquisition" multiple times. 2) VoidZero joins Cloudflare is still correct. Nobody forced anyone to accept a deal and do so
pjmlp 4mo ago
Yes, people love to blame the Microsoft's, Google's, Apple's and co. However the poor guys also have to legally accept being bought. Lets not pretend they aren't putting money into the bank.
yencabulator 4mo ago
Obligatory https://ourincrediblejourney.tumblr.com/ https://ourincrediblejourney.tumblr.com/

by Ajunne 4mo ago

nkohari 4mo ago

It is by choice, though? VoidZero was well-capitalized and could easily have continued to raise money for the foreseeable.

fredoliveira 4mo ago
Could they? Under what business model? Maybe the numbers for the paid products just weren't there and they see this exit as a positive for the team?
- nkohari 4mo ago
  It's an obvious partnership because Void Cloud was built on Cloudflare anyway, so having Cloudflare buying them directly just means that both companies don't need to carve out their own margin. Cloudflare is also happy to fund the work on Vite, Oxc, et al. while also having a more direct answer for Vercel and Next.js. With all that said, I don't think we can extrapolate that their business wasn't doing well or that they couldn't have raised more money. Cloudflare probably just offered a good enough deal that it didn't make sense to try to grind it out. What I really mean is that when M&A happens, it seems like a lot of people think the acquirer is the only one with any agency, and that's not true at all.

Aurornis 4mo ago

> As if they chose to do that. Yes, they agreed to it, That is the definition of making a choice. This is some incredible mental backflipping to suggest that their choice wasn’t their choice.

CapsAdmin 4mo ago
Just to steelman the GP; some people in the company made a choice while the rest had no say. I personally think the owners should get to decide, but it's an interesting duality. (assuming it's not like everyone has a share or something, in which case they would've all had to agree I guess)
- pjmlp 4mo ago
  That is what being employed means, otherwise own the business.
- Aurornis 4mo ago
  > I personally think the owners should get to decide, but it's an interesting duality. The owners of a business get to decide what to do with their business. > (assuming it's not like everyone has a share or something, in which case they would've all had to agree I guess) Unanimous agreement among shareholders is not necessary to sell a company. The employees might have had some shares in the company, but not all share classes have equal voting rights. It’s also unlikely that employees in aggregate would have had enough shares to override everyone else anyway. Once shares are split among investors, founders, and employees the individual ownership of any one person or group becomes small. I wouldn’t assume that the employees wanted to avoid acquisition. They likely benefited significantly from their shares being acquired and their new compensation packages. Imagining that the employees resisted this is projecting some other story on to them
- weird-eye-issue 4mo ago
  > I personally think the owners should get to decide Wow. Bold opinion. The owners of a company get to decide what to do with it?
- hobofan 4mo ago
  If you join an company with next to no monetizable business model like this, you already have made your choice that you are fine with acquisition when you joined, or have deferred your choice to make a stay/leave decision until the acquisition.

esskay 4mo ago

> Evan and the rest of the VoidZero team continue to lead Vite, Vitest, Rolldown, Oxc, and Vite+. Explain how thats not a clear indication of this being a choice and something they agreed to.

TheAlexLichter 4mo ago

1) The blog post mentions "acquisition" multiple times. 2) VoidZero joins Cloudflare is still correct. Nobody forced anyone to accept a deal and do so

pjmlp 4mo ago

Yes, people love to blame the Microsoft's, Google's, Apple's and co. However the poor guys also have to legally accept being bought. Lets not pretend they aren't putting money into the bank.

yencabulator 4mo ago

Obligatory https://ourincrediblejourney.tumblr.com/ https://ourincrediblejourney.tumblr.com/