3 ms·

While I think Jason Fried's post on the Mint exit was atypically ignorant, quite frankly — I don't think they wrote it believing that it would make everybody di

by tjogin 17y ago

While I think Jason Fried's post on the Mint exit was atypically ignorant, quite frankly — I don't think they wrote it believing that it would make everybody dislike the idea of a $170M exit. I think he was just expressing his opinion, like the rest of us. As ignorant as it was, it was still just an opinion, it wasn't scheming. There weren't ulterior motives.

jacquesm 17y ago
I don't think it was ignorant at all. He used the wrong foundation (and admitted so in the first line of his post) to make a very valid point. In case you mised it: Somebody someday has to have the balls to stand up to the status quo and sit it out all the way to the end instead of cashing out at some point. The problem with that is that: - cashing out is very very lucrative - you yourself will become part of the status quo if you don't sell out at some point - vcs really are looking at the 'exit', it's just that they prefer a 'late successful' exit over an 'early' exit (because once you are a winner you might as well win big, the chances of scoring a winner being as low as they are). - sticking it out for the long run isn't 'sexy' So there are a lot of factors driving the CEOs of young and successful companies to sell out to a larger fish at some point. Only very few companies are immune to that, I think right now Google and Microsoft are the few companies that are not going to be sold in the foreseeable future, they're here to stay. And Microsoft is as much a part of the establishment as you can be at this stage. Maybe facebook too, but I think they might just be hooking for a tremendous exit at some point. Almost everybody else is up for grabs if the price is right. We need many more googles, companies that are in it for the long haul. And barring that, if you do cash out do it like Elon Musk did, and plow your newfound fortune in to something absolutely amazing instead of lounging around and throwing parties and buying baseball teams, and writing long blog posts about how everybody is doing everything wrong.
dasil003 17y ago
There weren't ulterior motives. Weren't there? It seems to me there are always ulterior motives. That doesn't mean he was conscious of those motives when he wrote the article, or that they were in any way sinister, but when selling a philosophy is your bread and butter then there is a very strong tendency to turn a blind eye to any realities that don't jive with that philosophy. Even those of us who aren't selling anything do this all the time, so imagine when your livelihood is on the table.
- tjogin 17y ago
  Ulterior means "intentionally hidden" — it's not really possible to not be conscious of something intentionally hidden.

by tjogin 17y ago

jacquesm 17y ago

I don't think it was ignorant at all. He used the wrong foundation (and admitted so in the first line of his post) to make a very valid point. In case you mised it: Somebody someday has to have the balls to stand up to the status quo and sit it out all the way to the end instead of cashing out at some point. The problem with that is that: - cashing out is very very lucrative - you yourself will become part of the status quo if you don't sell out at some point - vcs really are looking at the 'exit', it's just that they prefer a 'late successful' exit over an 'early' exit (because once you are a winner you might as well win big, the chances of scoring a winner being as low as they are). - sticking it out for the long run isn't 'sexy' So there are a lot of factors driving the CEOs of young and successful companies to sell out to a larger fish at some point. Only very few companies are immune to that, I think right now Google and Microsoft are the few companies that are not going to be sold in the foreseeable future, they're here to stay. And Microsoft is as much a part of the establishment as you can be at this stage. Maybe facebook too, but I think they might just be hooking for a tremendous exit at some point. Almost everybody else is up for grabs if the price is right. We need many more googles, companies that are in it for the long haul. And barring that, if you do cash out do it like Elon Musk did, and plow your newfound fortune in to something absolutely amazing instead of lounging around and throwing parties and buying baseball teams, and writing long blog posts about how everybody is doing everything wrong.

dasil003 17y ago

There weren't ulterior motives. Weren't there? It seems to me there are always ulterior motives. That doesn't mean he was conscious of those motives when he wrote the article, or that they were in any way sinister, but when selling a philosophy is your bread and butter then there is a very strong tendency to turn a blind eye to any realities that don't jive with that philosophy. Even those of us who aren't selling anything do this all the time, so imagine when your livelihood is on the table.

tjogin 17y ago
Ulterior means "intentionally hidden" — it's not really possible to not be conscious of something intentionally hidden.