3 ms·
> Better to let the market sift out the successful founders than to payroll a hundred of them, hoping for a big win. Sorry, I can't help myself, but at a salar
by scep12 13y ago
> Better to let the market sift out the successful founders than to payroll a hundred of them, hoping for a big win.
Sorry, I can't help myself, but at a salary of $160k a year, payrolling "a hundred of them" per year would only cost 1/10th of what FB just paid for whatsapp.
It's too bad companies like FB and Twitter would rather let the 'founder' types slip by than to take more chances. When Facebook last tried to recruit me, they described themselves as "a bunch of startups that just happen to work under the same company." Yeah, right.
- technotony 13y agoI think you mean 1/1000th of what FB just paid... seems like it would be a good investment to me!
- scep12 13y agoI meant to write 1/100th - still a mental math fail! Stated in a different way - Facebook could have paid 1,000 teams of 10 (founders + engineers) at 160k/yr per person, for 10 years... for what they just paid for whatsapp. The collective diversity of products developed by said teams would probably be worth more than whatsapp.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- bduerst 13y agoOnly out of context. It's assuming that he would have founded WhatsApp while working within facebook.