4 ms·

Right, but you have to consider how early on this was, with little venture raised; multiples are way better. My point was bundling wins in the long term.

ElProlactin 2mo ago
Yeah, if he had sold and taken his money and invested it all in BTC or FB or Nvidia he would have been one of the richest people in the world. What you're missing is that he was able to build his company, run it for years, get paid well and step down from the CEO position with a stake worth a couple of billion dollars. You can't always reduce everything to money. Lots of entrepreneurs, perhaps the majority, would consider Drew's outcome to be the ideal one: you get to do what you love, raise your baby and earn a fortune. Not everyone wants to sell out, start a family office and spend their days on a boat pondering what the purpose of life is and what they should do next.
- retired 2mo ago
  Work at a soul sucking corporate for 17 years instead of enjoy life traveling around the world? In what way does that sound good? Reaction to fragmede as I am rate limited: You don’t have to travel full time. And yes working at Dropbox is boring. Dropbox stores files. Things haven’t changed since 2009. There is not any product growth. They still store files. 95% of their daily operations is sales. That doesn’t sound enticing to me.
  - fragmede 2mo ago
    If you hate travelling, in what way does doing that for 17 years sound like fun? Some people just do not like traveling and living out of a suitcase or backpack. Others, do. If you see being at a corporation as soul sucking, then don't, but I imagine that if you're the CEO of the corporation, it's a different story than if you're a drone, and see yourself as one. Retirement is great, you get to choose what to do. Some people choose to fuck off to the beach. Others choose to keep writing code, like Larry Finger. No one's gonna shame you for not being Larry Finger in your retirement, but we should celebrate the people who chose to do good works.
    - rglullis 2mo ago
      For the system, there is not a lot of difference whether you are the slave or the slave driver. But oh boy would the system be in in trouble if it had more free people around...
      - suslik 2mo ago
        Yes it would be very much in trouble. I wouldn’t want to be around to witness that, though.
        retired 2mo ago
        Visit the Netherlands. People get paid to work less. That is going to do wonders in the future I guess. Healthcare system is already massively strained.
  - wickedsight 2mo ago
    > Work at a soul sucking corporate for 17 years instead of enjoy life traveling around the world? It might be difficult to believe, but some people enjoy running companies just as much as others enjoy traveling the world. Different people have different interests and goals in life. Neither is wrong. Also, we can't just have people who retire as soon as they have enough money to travel around the world for the rest of their lives, we would only have inexperienced people in many important positions. 3 million is probably enough for that, if you don't demand too much luxury, and that's close to 1% of US families.
  - ponector 2mo ago
    >> Work at a soul sucking corporate for 17 years I'm pretty much sure it is not soul sucking if you are a CEO.
    - retired 2mo ago
      The CEO of a company that stores files. That is all they do and have been doing for 17 years. Seems rather soul sucking to me.
ggm 2mo ago
Not spending time with 10/100/1000 millions people very much I appreciate there may be a boundary between 10 amd 100 but between 100 and 1000 I remain unsure there is a functionally useful distinction which would motivate me, per the money. Maybe it's about the zero as a rei-ified thing in itself but if somebody decides to stop at 100 and you argue they should have driven to 1000 what axiomatically makes you "right"? This feels like a judgement purely in financial numerology. Is bigger of necessity "better" for every founder?

ElProlactin 2mo ago

Yeah, if he had sold and taken his money and invested it all in BTC or FB or Nvidia he would have been one of the richest people in the world. What you're missing is that he was able to build his company, run it for years, get paid well and step down from the CEO position with a stake worth a couple of billion dollars. You can't always reduce everything to money. Lots of entrepreneurs, perhaps the majority, would consider Drew's outcome to be the ideal one: you get to do what you love, raise your baby and earn a fortune. Not everyone wants to sell out, start a family office and spend their days on a boat pondering what the purpose of life is and what they should do next.

retired 2mo ago
Work at a soul sucking corporate for 17 years instead of enjoy life traveling around the world? In what way does that sound good? Reaction to fragmede as I am rate limited: You don’t have to travel full time. And yes working at Dropbox is boring. Dropbox stores files. Things haven’t changed since 2009. There is not any product growth. They still store files. 95% of their daily operations is sales. That doesn’t sound enticing to me.
- fragmede 2mo ago
  If you hate travelling, in what way does doing that for 17 years sound like fun? Some people just do not like traveling and living out of a suitcase or backpack. Others, do. If you see being at a corporation as soul sucking, then don't, but I imagine that if you're the CEO of the corporation, it's a different story than if you're a drone, and see yourself as one. Retirement is great, you get to choose what to do. Some people choose to fuck off to the beach. Others choose to keep writing code, like Larry Finger. No one's gonna shame you for not being Larry Finger in your retirement, but we should celebrate the people who chose to do good works.
  - rglullis 2mo ago
    For the system, there is not a lot of difference whether you are the slave or the slave driver. But oh boy would the system be in in trouble if it had more free people around...
    - suslik 2mo ago
      Yes it would be very much in trouble. I wouldn’t want to be around to witness that, though.
      - retired 2mo ago
        Visit the Netherlands. People get paid to work less. That is going to do wonders in the future I guess. Healthcare system is already massively strained.
- wickedsight 2mo ago
  > Work at a soul sucking corporate for 17 years instead of enjoy life traveling around the world? It might be difficult to believe, but some people enjoy running companies just as much as others enjoy traveling the world. Different people have different interests and goals in life. Neither is wrong. Also, we can't just have people who retire as soon as they have enough money to travel around the world for the rest of their lives, we would only have inexperienced people in many important positions. 3 million is probably enough for that, if you don't demand too much luxury, and that's close to 1% of US families.
- ponector 2mo ago
  >> Work at a soul sucking corporate for 17 years I'm pretty much sure it is not soul sucking if you are a CEO.
  - retired 2mo ago
    The CEO of a company that stores files. That is all they do and have been doing for 17 years. Seems rather soul sucking to me.

ggm 2mo ago

Not spending time with 10/100/1000 millions people very much I appreciate there may be a boundary between 10 amd 100 but between 100 and 1000 I remain unsure there is a functionally useful distinction which would motivate me, per the money. Maybe it's about the zero as a rei-ified thing in itself but if somebody decides to stop at 100 and you argue they should have driven to 1000 what axiomatically makes you "right"? This feels like a judgement purely in financial numerology. Is bigger of necessity "better" for every founder?