I'm actually pleased to hear that a tech company is going to perish. Too many of them think they are invincible (airbnb)
They seem like humble guys who are constantly at battle to save their company.
http://www.businessinsider.com/airbnb-co-founders-freshman-r...
Perhaps high connected friends - who knows? But there are people sending 1/1000th of spam volume he did and are doing 10 years in jail, so ultimately that's where I think Nathan belongs.
I think the comment more refers to hospitality industry litigiousness (and sometimes, competition). I think any feeling of invincibility would be curtailed by constant embattlement in their own headquarter city.
You ever had a surprise AirBnB right above you? At 4AM on a Wednesday morning? Yeah, the tenant got dinged, eventually... maybe. I still had the joy of feeling someone's musical choices during time I had planned to be asleep with no real recourse from security or the police.
I was talking about the founders being humble.
My point was that the company doesn't seem to think they're invincible. They seem aware of the dangers.
http://www.theverge.com/2015/10/22/9591596/airbnb-san-franci...
personally, i think the point where a startup becomes a company is very clear: the point where the company's core business is able to provide sustainable positive cash flow. i believe that as long as a company is still in the "burn rate" phase where instead of trying to figure out where they can squeeze more profits, they're simply trying to figure out how long they can keep running with what money they have left, then they're firmly still in the startup phase.
http://archives.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2015/10/21/passive-ag...
"We emailed Airbnb spokesman Christopher Nulty to ask whether the library ad was "real." He responded by email, "as opposed to a fake one :)"
A follow up email, explaining that we were in fact seeking confirmation as to whether the ads are actually from Airbnb received the following response: "Are you seriously writing on this?"
Nulty did not respond to another follow up email. "
I repeat for the downvoters the OP said he is rejoicing in the failure of a company. Screw people loosing their jobs.
I don't care if theranos is Exxon mobile or JP. I would rather they learn and adapt for the better. Stop doing what ever is bad. Btw this my first downvote ever of which I wrote a comment why.
Edit
I wish I could delete my comment as I guess I must have said something terrible to get so downvoted. I assumed I must have offended someone. I just don't like some one "hoping" for the down fall of others and I feel strongly about it.
That's kind of like saying it's not the robber who killed, but the blade of his knife, therefore the robber should not be blamed.
Business models don't just appear out of thin air to strike at unsuspecting people. They're willingly created and perpetuated by people in the process of running their companies, and thus the people (and the companies) are ultimately responsible for the consequences.
Of course theranos did bad things and of course I companies failing can be good for the market but I don't hope for it just because I don't think the company is "humble".
And even if I think the company is getting unfair privileges and lacks humility I'd rather the company pivot or adjust then complete failure. And that whoever is enabling them (company) change as well!
Complete failure aka bankruptcy (or analog) is very bad particularly if the company is bigger.
Changing where you work can be as life changing as moving. Not all employees of a massive company have easy to switch jobs like developers do.
> I'm actually pleased to hear that a tech company is going to perish. Too many of them think they are invincible (airbnb)
The OP said a tech and not theranos. Wishing failure on really any company is IMO a terrible attitude. What you want is the company to change and improve.
It appears the OP is glad that people will loose jobs and options in the company (i.e. regular employees).
I don't agree with North Korea or China but do I really want them to fail? No you want change and improvement.
I want North Korea to fail so the people in that country experience change. I don't care if the government itself survives, especially given the atrocities they've committed on their own people.
Companies shouldn't survive just for the sake of keeping people employed, either. They absolutely should be judged on their product. There's no ethical argument to make here.
I'm not saying I want the status quo but saying you want pretty much all tech companies to fail is extreme and is what the OP pretty much said.
> I'm actually pleased to hear that a tech company is going to perish.
How is this constructive?
This isn't some joy in evolution or plot/crop burning:
> Too many of them think they are invincible (airbnb)
The OP is upset ostensibly because I guess they are not humble. And apparently neither is airbnb in his opinion. I bet MS and apple were not humble either in their beginnings. Both MS and facebook were founded by not rags to riches but Harvard drop outs with wealthy families.
Crops have inherent positive value. Business do not. Who cares about humility? It has nothing to do with whether a business should succeed or fail. People who have an axe to grind don't belong in a discussion about, well, anything but their feelings.
Creative Destruction - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction
Theranos _should_ go out of business. it was based on a fraud.