7 ms·

I bet all the execs got well paid for their terrible efforts though and they will slide into new positions of power regardless of their merit. We need to take o

I bet all the execs got well paid for their terrible efforts though and they will slide into new positions of power regardless of their merit. We need to take our industry back from the leeches. The near-sighted execs with nothing but paper accolades and networks of cronies.

der3k 13y ago
Start your own company then and set an example instead of criticizing others. Edit: Thanks for all the upvotes/support. To those who see this as legitimate criticism, really? The OP elaborated on nothing - no constructive criticisms were made. Instead, it just sounds like pure anger and naïveté on my end, alluding to all entrepreneurs trying to make it/who have made it as "leeches" and "near-sighted execs" that have "networks of cronies." Stay classy.
- ksk 13y ago
  So you need to start your own restaurant before complaining about food?
  - tomovo 13y ago
    The price, maybe. Food - not.
- crimsonzagar 13y ago
  Criticism is extremely important for any cos. and its executives. Criticism can potentially save any Zynga from sliding away to nothingness ...
  - mseebach 13y ago
    It very charitable to call the GP's rant "criticism".
    - crimsonzagar 13y ago
      That's correct. Which makes me wonder if rant = criticism + emotion? If yes, then he/she who rants does make good for an entrepreneur but only if that quality gets toned and put into action. I believe there would exist some analysis/research around this already. For there does seem some evidence of great companies been built by people who were hurt, emotional or egoistic about their shit.
  - Samuel_Michon 13y ago
    Given its products and business model, Zynga fading away into nothingness is probably the best thing for everyone.
- pkfrank 13y ago
  Is it not legitimate to call out piss-poor management and cronyism without also "setting an example?" Does this mean that only people at the helm of $1b+ companies are able to criticize Zynga's pathetic ineptitude? Not sure what your aggressive reply accomplishes; at least OP has sparked discussion to point out a major flaw and source of Zynga's downfall.
  - jgross206 13y ago
    Talk is cheap. It's very, very easy to criticize from afar when you have no skin in the game. So, that type of criticism holds very little weight.
    - obviouslygreen 13y ago
      Bullshit. This kind of passive-ad-hominem is worse than worthless. If you disregard criticism of actions by people who aren't taking those actions, you're left listening only to people who are actually doing those things... and guess what? They're probably not exactly railing against their own paradigms. Talk is only cheap if you're lapping it up in bulk from poor sources. If talk were always cheap, advisory boards and mentors would never, ever provide any value. So by all means, throw it away; disregard people based on who they are and not what they say. It's your own loss. Just have the decency not to mislead people who are looking for guidance with your own cheap talk.
      - larrys 13y ago
        "when you have no skin in the game" Your parent is referring to perhaps (similar to) talking heads in a way that they get on TV not knowing all the facts or reasoning and state after the fact what should be. But even if they state "before the fact" there is not a complete record of their thoughts on everything as being vetted as correct (success has a million fathers etc.) So you can go back and say "see I said this was a bad idea" but what about the other 20 things someone says that you don't have the same outcome? You can just cherry pick. There is a common stock ruse that works this way. You call people up and say "I'm giving you a tip don't buy now". Then next month you call back all the people that you gave "tip a" to but not failed "tip b". That said there is much to learn from criticism no matter where it comes from or what their axe is to grind etc.
- raheemm 13y ago
  If failure of such magnitude cannot be criticized, then what should be?
  - tlb 13y ago
    Not even trying. Edit: no, that's too mean. But I like people who take risks, and I get defensive when people snicker at failure from their armchairs of hindsight. We should learn from failures, but not rush to say, "he failed, what an idiot!"
    - ianstallings 13y ago
      I'm curious how you know so much about me. How do you know what I've done? I've already started my own companies bud and sold them, twice. I'm working on my third now after just building a startup with some others called Brabble. Here it is: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/brabble/id570281083?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/brabble/id570281083?mt=8 To the post below: BKRGB which was an signage platform and ShaiSoft, which sold networking library software. The rest of the details are none of your business sir. I like how you belittle me because my numbers aren't big enough on the Brabble app. I've heard all this type of BS before. Don't listen to me then. Just keep attacking other developers for trying. BTW, we have a NASCAR running this on June 7th in the Party in the Poconos 400 with our logo on it. Keep an eye out for it. We're just starting.
      - tlb 13y ago
        Hey, that's great. I hope Brabble succeeds, and the next one and the one after that. Perhaps, someday, one of your ventures will fail. You can minimize the psychic pain by learning not to equate business failure with bad intentions.
      - IAmAI343 13y ago
        Since you brought it up, which companies are those? Otherwise It just seems like you are making it up to make yourself look better. By the way, I've also made iOs apps that barely get any ratings.
- ianstallings 13y ago
  It's legit because IMHO there is a pervading feeling across the industry that we are being taken advantage of. Ask around, I can't be the only one that feels as if there are a bunch of hanger-ons who learn the bare minimum about tech and want to share in the riches. Look around you.
- ryguytilidie 13y ago
  There is nothing I dislike more about Silicon Valley than this attitude. Yesterday I saw someone tweet "funny how people who criticize startups usually aren't the ones starting them, might be something to that..." Or maybe we could realize that this creates a ridiculous logical fallacy on the level of "only god can judge me". Who decided that the only people who can criticize obvious mistakes, shady behavior and being a downright bad person is literally immune to all criticism from 99% of people? How on earth does even a single person think this is passable logic? I get that being a founder is hard, but saying that people literally cannot criticize founders unless they themselves have started a company is absolutely absurd. I cannot believe you and others would lack the self awareness to realize this... "alluding to all entrepreneurs trying to make it/who have made it as "leeches" and "near-sighted execs" that have "networks of cronies." Stay classy." Just saw this edit. I really don't know how you managed to read it like that. But yeah, there you go, just create a strawman, tell others to stay classy and smugly believe you're right and you'll never have to actually deal with the idea that you might be wrong.
  - der3k 13y ago
    "We need to take our industry back from the leeches." Hence, my recommendation to create his/her own company as an effort to "take back the industry." I never mentioned or implied that one would need to be an entrepreneur in order to criticize others in this field. And if you are going to criticize others, do it constructively, which the original OP obviously didn't do. Thanks.
- socialist_coder 13y ago
  Ex-Zynga here, and that's exactly what I've done. We're prioritizing profit sharing over equity, so as the company does really well (as Zynga did in the years prior to their IPO), all employees who contribute will be making a lot of money, not just the founders.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
Ixiaus 13y ago
There isn't anything to "take back" - other than Government sponsored monopolies or price ceilings/floors, the market is OPEN to you! There are many competent people building amazing companies, incompetent people getting paid well, competent people getting paid badly, competent people making lots of money and being fair with their employees. This (corporate) world is less black and white than you're making it out to be. Realizing someone is performing or behaving poorly isn't a bad thing at all (it's how we learn!) but sitting on HN declaring that the nebulous "we" needs to "take back" our industry from leeches is absolutely ridiculous. Like the other commenter said, go build your own company! If you truly are more competent, fair, and mindful as a leader THOSE TYPES will flock to you. It's what I'm doing. It's what many entrepreneurs I know are doing.
- abraininavat 13y ago
  One could argue that the system is currently set up to benefit executives (who often end up winning, regardless of whether the company loses) at the expense of shareholders and/or the general public. One could argue that this is a problem that market forces can't fix, and therefore that a regulatory solution is called for. One might refer to this sort of regulation as "taking back" the unfair advantages the executives currently.enjoy. Suggesting that we all are free to become executives and take part in the problem may be true, but it doesn't fix the problem or eve address whether one exists.
  - unoti 13y ago
    Shame on the shareholders, then, for letting that happen. In the case of Zynga, why did they buy stock? Was it because Zynga was an amazing company with brilliant technology, a solid executive team focusing on long term fundamentals and sustainable business practices? Or did most of them invest because the stock price was going up and the business had buzzwords like "social", and so they jumped in like sheep to try to ride the gravy train? There's truth in what you say about the system rewarding the lazy. But that's fundamentally because of the stupidity and laziness of the shareholders. There's still opportunity in this turbulent system though to pick winners, and be a shareholder that rewards competence and punishes incompetence.
ksk 13y ago
Well, the core problem is that the freemium model is not sustainable for most businesses. There are very very few companies that can remain cash flow positive (let alone making large profits). The execs get paid well because the owners of those companies assume (rightly or wrongly) that the execs performance determines the outcome of the business. The average engineer working in that company is assumed to not have such power (which is true for a lot of companies). BTW If any company started holding up salaries of their employees dependent on profit, nobody would join that company !
- thedufer 13y ago
  > BTW If any company started holding up salaries of their employees dependent on profit, nobody would join that company ! That's a pretty bold statement. Any particular reason you think that's true? I don't think profit sharing is that arcane of a concept. Unless you're talking about the extreme of no salary, only profit-sharing, in which case, yeah. But that's not what execs get, either.
  - ksk 13y ago
    Good point.
- InclinedPlane 13y ago
  I disagree on your last statement. I think that if a reasonable base salary were provided and profit sharing was done well and was truly equitable (i.e. not more than an order of magnitude different from 1/n of profit for n employees) then it could be quite attractive. It's all about trust and track-record.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - ksk 13y ago
    Yes, there is room for disagreement. I accept your point.
  - deleted 13y ago

der3k 13y ago

Start your own company then and set an example instead of criticizing others. Edit: Thanks for all the upvotes/support. To those who see this as legitimate criticism, really? The OP elaborated on nothing - no constructive criticisms were made. Instead, it just sounds like pure anger and naïveté on my end, alluding to all entrepreneurs trying to make it/who have made it as "leeches" and "near-sighted execs" that have "networks of cronies." Stay classy.

ksk 13y ago
So you need to start your own restaurant before complaining about food?
- tomovo 13y ago
  The price, maybe. Food - not.
crimsonzagar 13y ago
Criticism is extremely important for any cos. and its executives. Criticism can potentially save any Zynga from sliding away to nothingness ...
- mseebach 13y ago
  It very charitable to call the GP's rant "criticism".
  - crimsonzagar 13y ago
    That's correct. Which makes me wonder if rant = criticism + emotion? If yes, then he/she who rants does make good for an entrepreneur but only if that quality gets toned and put into action. I believe there would exist some analysis/research around this already. For there does seem some evidence of great companies been built by people who were hurt, emotional or egoistic about their shit.
- Samuel_Michon 13y ago
  Given its products and business model, Zynga fading away into nothingness is probably the best thing for everyone.
pkfrank 13y ago
Is it not legitimate to call out piss-poor management and cronyism without also "setting an example?" Does this mean that only people at the helm of $1b+ companies are able to criticize Zynga's pathetic ineptitude? Not sure what your aggressive reply accomplishes; at least OP has sparked discussion to point out a major flaw and source of Zynga's downfall.
- jgross206 13y ago
  Talk is cheap. It's very, very easy to criticize from afar when you have no skin in the game. So, that type of criticism holds very little weight.
  - obviouslygreen 13y ago
    Bullshit. This kind of passive-ad-hominem is worse than worthless. If you disregard criticism of actions by people who aren't taking those actions, you're left listening only to people who are actually doing those things... and guess what? They're probably not exactly railing against their own paradigms. Talk is only cheap if you're lapping it up in bulk from poor sources. If talk were always cheap, advisory boards and mentors would never, ever provide any value. So by all means, throw it away; disregard people based on who they are and not what they say. It's your own loss. Just have the decency not to mislead people who are looking for guidance with your own cheap talk.
    - larrys 13y ago
      "when you have no skin in the game" Your parent is referring to perhaps (similar to) talking heads in a way that they get on TV not knowing all the facts or reasoning and state after the fact what should be. But even if they state "before the fact" there is not a complete record of their thoughts on everything as being vetted as correct (success has a million fathers etc.) So you can go back and say "see I said this was a bad idea" but what about the other 20 things someone says that you don't have the same outcome? You can just cherry pick. There is a common stock ruse that works this way. You call people up and say "I'm giving you a tip don't buy now". Then next month you call back all the people that you gave "tip a" to but not failed "tip b". That said there is much to learn from criticism no matter where it comes from or what their axe is to grind etc.
raheemm 13y ago
If failure of such magnitude cannot be criticized, then what should be?
- tlb 13y ago
  Not even trying. Edit: no, that's too mean. But I like people who take risks, and I get defensive when people snicker at failure from their armchairs of hindsight. We should learn from failures, but not rush to say, "he failed, what an idiot!"
  - ianstallings 13y ago
    I'm curious how you know so much about me. How do you know what I've done? I've already started my own companies bud and sold them, twice. I'm working on my third now after just building a startup with some others called Brabble. Here it is: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/brabble/id570281083?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/brabble/id570281083?mt=8 To the post below: BKRGB which was an signage platform and ShaiSoft, which sold networking library software. The rest of the details are none of your business sir. I like how you belittle me because my numbers aren't big enough on the Brabble app. I've heard all this type of BS before. Don't listen to me then. Just keep attacking other developers for trying. BTW, we have a NASCAR running this on June 7th in the Party in the Poconos 400 with our logo on it. Keep an eye out for it. We're just starting.
    - tlb 13y ago
      Hey, that's great. I hope Brabble succeeds, and the next one and the one after that. Perhaps, someday, one of your ventures will fail. You can minimize the psychic pain by learning not to equate business failure with bad intentions.
    - IAmAI343 13y ago
      Since you brought it up, which companies are those? Otherwise It just seems like you are making it up to make yourself look better. By the way, I've also made iOs apps that barely get any ratings.
ianstallings 13y ago
It's legit because IMHO there is a pervading feeling across the industry that we are being taken advantage of. Ask around, I can't be the only one that feels as if there are a bunch of hanger-ons who learn the bare minimum about tech and want to share in the riches. Look around you.
ryguytilidie 13y ago
There is nothing I dislike more about Silicon Valley than this attitude. Yesterday I saw someone tweet "funny how people who criticize startups usually aren't the ones starting them, might be something to that..." Or maybe we could realize that this creates a ridiculous logical fallacy on the level of "only god can judge me". Who decided that the only people who can criticize obvious mistakes, shady behavior and being a downright bad person is literally immune to all criticism from 99% of people? How on earth does even a single person think this is passable logic? I get that being a founder is hard, but saying that people literally cannot criticize founders unless they themselves have started a company is absolutely absurd. I cannot believe you and others would lack the self awareness to realize this... "alluding to all entrepreneurs trying to make it/who have made it as "leeches" and "near-sighted execs" that have "networks of cronies." Stay classy." Just saw this edit. I really don't know how you managed to read it like that. But yeah, there you go, just create a strawman, tell others to stay classy and smugly believe you're right and you'll never have to actually deal with the idea that you might be wrong.
- der3k 13y ago
  "We need to take our industry back from the leeches." Hence, my recommendation to create his/her own company as an effort to "take back the industry." I never mentioned or implied that one would need to be an entrepreneur in order to criticize others in this field. And if you are going to criticize others, do it constructively, which the original OP obviously didn't do. Thanks.
socialist_coder 13y ago
Ex-Zynga here, and that's exactly what I've done. We're prioritizing profit sharing over equity, so as the company does really well (as Zynga did in the years prior to their IPO), all employees who contribute will be making a lot of money, not just the founders.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

Ixiaus 13y ago

There isn't anything to "take back" - other than Government sponsored monopolies or price ceilings/floors, the market is OPEN to you! There are many competent people building amazing companies, incompetent people getting paid well, competent people getting paid badly, competent people making lots of money and being fair with their employees. This (corporate) world is less black and white than you're making it out to be. Realizing someone is performing or behaving poorly isn't a bad thing at all (it's how we learn!) but sitting on HN declaring that the nebulous "we" needs to "take back" our industry from leeches is absolutely ridiculous. Like the other commenter said, go build your own company! If you truly are more competent, fair, and mindful as a leader THOSE TYPES will flock to you. It's what I'm doing. It's what many entrepreneurs I know are doing.

abraininavat 13y ago
One could argue that the system is currently set up to benefit executives (who often end up winning, regardless of whether the company loses) at the expense of shareholders and/or the general public. One could argue that this is a problem that market forces can't fix, and therefore that a regulatory solution is called for. One might refer to this sort of regulation as "taking back" the unfair advantages the executives currently.enjoy. Suggesting that we all are free to become executives and take part in the problem may be true, but it doesn't fix the problem or eve address whether one exists.
- unoti 13y ago
  Shame on the shareholders, then, for letting that happen. In the case of Zynga, why did they buy stock? Was it because Zynga was an amazing company with brilliant technology, a solid executive team focusing on long term fundamentals and sustainable business practices? Or did most of them invest because the stock price was going up and the business had buzzwords like "social", and so they jumped in like sheep to try to ride the gravy train? There's truth in what you say about the system rewarding the lazy. But that's fundamentally because of the stupidity and laziness of the shareholders. There's still opportunity in this turbulent system though to pick winners, and be a shareholder that rewards competence and punishes incompetence.

ksk 13y ago

Well, the core problem is that the freemium model is not sustainable for most businesses. There are very very few companies that can remain cash flow positive (let alone making large profits). The execs get paid well because the owners of those companies assume (rightly or wrongly) that the execs performance determines the outcome of the business. The average engineer working in that company is assumed to not have such power (which is true for a lot of companies). BTW If any company started holding up salaries of their employees dependent on profit, nobody would join that company !

thedufer 13y ago
> BTW If any company started holding up salaries of their employees dependent on profit, nobody would join that company ! That's a pretty bold statement. Any particular reason you think that's true? I don't think profit sharing is that arcane of a concept. Unless you're talking about the extreme of no salary, only profit-sharing, in which case, yeah. But that's not what execs get, either.
- ksk 13y ago
  Good point.
InclinedPlane 13y ago
I disagree on your last statement. I think that if a reasonable base salary were provided and profit sharing was done well and was truly equitable (i.e. not more than an order of magnitude different from 1/n of profit for n employees) then it could be quite attractive. It's all about trust and track-record.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- ksk 13y ago
  Yes, there is room for disagreement. I accept your point.
- deleted 13y ago