3 ms·
Most likely they would have gone out of business either way because nobody is going to do an acqui-hire deal if their company had plenty of funding or was actua
by jakejake 13y ago
Most likely they would have gone out of business either way because nobody is going to do an acqui-hire deal if their company had plenty of funding or was actually profitable. If I was working somewhere, I'd rather the founders managed to finagle an acqui-hire rather fire everybody.
You're right, though, there's nothing great about it for the users.
- hga 13y agoNot necessarily. They could have been not profitable enough, for themselves or their investors, especially if they got a rich enough acqui-hire offer. Or however profitable their efforts, if they couldn't raise enough money to properly peruse them. They could be facing more work of a type they don't like or weren't good enough at (including hiring the necessary talent), e.g. marketing and sales, and preferred the maximum pivot possible.
- jakejake 13y agoWell, those are all just variations of either not being a successful, profitable company or the founders simply not caring anymore. The end result would still likely be the same for the users.
- zimbatm 13y agoYou can still make an exit and be graceful about it. Clearly in their message they mention that user's trust was important to them. I believe that in that case the best reward is to be honest with them. If I was an entrepreneur I would be rather annoyed by that kind of message because user's trust is a shared resource. It's selfish. Soon enough start-up will start to be negatively connoted. A sort of Made-in-China in the virtual world.