4 ms·

The people who propose these inane conspiracy theories always forget one critical component: why the acquirer was such a willing patsy.

by pg 14y ago

pdeuchler 14y ago
I believe that by definition a patsy is always quite willing. The OP might be a little off in this case, but I fail to see how this is inane. A publication that is run by someone who has a conflict of interest released a large media blitz that undoubtedly painted Mailbox in a very positive light, leading to an arguably overpriced acquisition. I honestly don't know enough to make a judgment, but following the money has never lead me wrong before.
- damoncali 14y ago
  You have to believe that Dropbox is idiotic for that to be true. The media is notorious for misreporting deals, you really have to read between the lines to even attempt to see the truth - journalists tend to lack financial training/knowledge. What's more likely? 1)Dropbox is run by idiots who get all excited by reading TechCrunch and Twitter, so they jump at the opportunity to overpay for an unproven app without thinking it through. or... 2)Mailbox dovetails nicely with Dropbox's plans and culture, and is a solid app to kickstart something that Dropbox would have done themselves anyhow. They get talent to boot. And they pay, not up front, but over time as Mailbox meets the high expectations implied up by a potential value of $100M. I have no idea what the terms and strategy of that deal were/are, but I'd bet they look a lot more like 2 than 1.
- tptacek 14y ago
  What you're saying is that you think Dropbox values acquisitions by collecting media stories and measuring their sentiments. Have you ever been involved in an acquisition? The ones I've been a party to involved proctological levels of due diligence. The idea that Techcruch coverage even occurred to anyone involved after the first or second meeting is comically naive.
  - ghshephard 14y ago
    Well, in all fairness (and I do think that the original conspiracy theory is inane, and reflects someone with an axe to grind rather than a rational assessment of the situation) - the actual hype cycle would look more like: o Write up a great story that makes a product sound amazing o Get lots of people to use it, wait in line o Dropbox values the application based on user engagement stats. I don't think there is any evidence that Ryan Lawler (the author of the TechCrunch Mailbox Stories) was incented or directed in any way to write them. Indeed, here on HN, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5389748 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5389748, he states that he and Arrington/Siegler don't even have any type of special relationship. He's not even sure that Arrington even knows who he is. With all that said - I just checked, and I've finally (after a month?) made it to the front of the line, so I'm off to chase Inbox Zero!
    - tptacek 14y ago
      And who's to say long-term user engagement predictions had anything to do with the valuation? If you were Drew Houston and had all the resources of Dropbox to leverage using what appears to be one of the most popular mobile email applications in the world, what could you come up with? How much would it be worth to have a credible vehicle with which to compete directly with Google Mail, for instance?

The people who propose these inane conspiracy theories always forget one critical component: why the acquirer was such a willing patsy.

by pg 14y ago

The people who propose these inane conspiracy theories always forget one critical component: why the acquirer was such a willing patsy.

pdeuchler 14y ago

I believe that by definition a patsy is always quite willing. The OP might be a little off in this case, but I fail to see how this is inane. A publication that is run by someone who has a conflict of interest released a large media blitz that undoubtedly painted Mailbox in a very positive light, leading to an arguably overpriced acquisition. I honestly don't know enough to make a judgment, but following the money has never lead me wrong before.

damoncali 14y ago
You have to believe that Dropbox is idiotic for that to be true. The media is notorious for misreporting deals, you really have to read between the lines to even attempt to see the truth - journalists tend to lack financial training/knowledge. What's more likely? 1)Dropbox is run by idiots who get all excited by reading TechCrunch and Twitter, so they jump at the opportunity to overpay for an unproven app without thinking it through. or... 2)Mailbox dovetails nicely with Dropbox's plans and culture, and is a solid app to kickstart something that Dropbox would have done themselves anyhow. They get talent to boot. And they pay, not up front, but over time as Mailbox meets the high expectations implied up by a potential value of $100M. I have no idea what the terms and strategy of that deal were/are, but I'd bet they look a lot more like 2 than 1.
tptacek 14y ago
What you're saying is that you think Dropbox values acquisitions by collecting media stories and measuring their sentiments. Have you ever been involved in an acquisition? The ones I've been a party to involved proctological levels of due diligence. The idea that Techcruch coverage even occurred to anyone involved after the first or second meeting is comically naive.
- ghshephard 14y ago
  Well, in all fairness (and I do think that the original conspiracy theory is inane, and reflects someone with an axe to grind rather than a rational assessment of the situation) - the actual hype cycle would look more like: o Write up a great story that makes a product sound amazing o Get lots of people to use it, wait in line o Dropbox values the application based on user engagement stats. I don't think there is any evidence that Ryan Lawler (the author of the TechCrunch Mailbox Stories) was incented or directed in any way to write them. Indeed, here on HN, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5389748 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5389748, he states that he and Arrington/Siegler don't even have any type of special relationship. He's not even sure that Arrington even knows who he is. With all that said - I just checked, and I've finally (after a month?) made it to the front of the line, so I'm off to chase Inbox Zero!
  - tptacek 14y ago
    And who's to say long-term user engagement predictions had anything to do with the valuation? If you were Drew Houston and had all the resources of Dropbox to leverage using what appears to be one of the most popular mobile email applications in the world, what could you come up with? How much would it be worth to have a credible vehicle with which to compete directly with Google Mail, for instance?