4 ms·
Indeed. There is no risk-free approach to being on the user's side in a case like this. Choose from: 1) get acquired and risk a possible shutdown by the acquir
by wes-exp 13y ago
Indeed. There is no risk-free approach to being on the user's side in a case like this. Choose from:
1) get acquired and risk a possible shutdown by the acquirer;
2) don't get acquired and risk a possible shutdown by worsening economics, competition, etc. (most fledgling businesses are vulnerable compared to the security of Google)
- JoeAltmaier 13y agoAnd 1) comes with a payout. So no brainer.
- _delirium 13y agoIn some cases, that's the choice, especially when the company isn't profitable, or is barely so. In this case, though, it seems #2 wasn't a major risk. Or at least the founder claims in this thread that it wasn't: he describes it as a sustainable, growing company on sound financial footing, which didn't sell out of necessity.