When George Lucas pitched Star Wars to Fox, he could've took a higher salary than the one that was on offer. He declined and instead asked for the full rights to any sequels, and all merchandise lol.
What you lot don't understand is that essentially hes been offered 5 mil for an algorithm
How long before someone else manages to create some similar coding?
How much will his "product" be worth then?
not even that. an established company could establish a department and have something out in 12 months, with a bigger more trusted name, more marketing money and a wider reach.
although i get his point about not selling, they could have done whatever they wanted and ruined his vision
Im for all innovation and entrepreneurship. But for every 1 success below there are millions of other failures in the start up industry
If that's the case take the 5 mill and invest in the other ideas he has
These type of guys are no doubt sick at the tech part, but usually not so savvy when it comes to business.
If you built something that had a chance, ANY chance of being REALLY succesfull. Why would you give up on it, at the first opportunity?
He's clearly not driven by money. He wants to see how far he can take it. If it fails, he'll prob start a next thing. If he's had enough of starting companies, he could go work anywhere and earn £200 -£250k calm.
35 minutes ago, Trap God said:
A lot of irrelevant examples being thrown around
What you lot don't understand is that essentially hes been offered 5 mil for an algorithm
How long before someone else manages to create some similar coding?
How much will his "product" be worth then?
I could build a youtube, snapchat, instagram clone in a week.
Product worth is determined by how many people use it. Like Dave said, If you're first to market, you already have an edge.
Noone was trying to buy Facebook for millions before it actually had users. Poor example as I said
Comparing apples with oranges.
That wasn't my point tbh.
It's not always as easy to replicate something as you're making out. My point being that facebook had a ton of offers when it was still a startup, from companies that had the finances and resources to build their own versions or better, and never did/could.
I'm sure when Google and Microsoft came sniffing around, people thought they were mad for turning them down too.
If you have a look at why facebook is/was so highly valued, their algorithms are right up there.
Recommended Posts
Exactly
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MGEEZ
Take the money approach is shirt sighted imo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mame Biram Diouf
Why?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greens
Snapchat turned down 3 billion from Facebook couple years ago and now it's valued at 20.
If you believe your product is worth more then go for it, fair play to him.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Heero Yuy
When George Lucas pitched Star Wars to Fox, he could've took a higher salary than the one that was on offer. He declined and instead asked for the full rights to any sequels, and all merchandise lol.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wavant
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mame Biram Diouf
Im for all innovation and entrepreneurship. But for every 1 success below there are millions of other failures in the start up industry
If that's the case take the 5 mill and invest in the other ideas he has
These type of guys are no doubt sick at the tech part, but usually not so savvy when it comes to business.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SLEAZE BALL
A lot of irrelevant examples being thrown around
What you lot don't understand is that essentially hes been offered 5 mil for an algorithm
How long before someone else manages to create some similar coding?
How much will his "product" be worth then?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Seydou
I would've took less and keep some shares tbh if it came down to that or taking 5 mill straight
Win win,nah?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
QPR Dee
not even that. an established company could establish a department and have something out in 12 months, with a bigger more trusted name, more marketing money and a wider reach.
although i get his point about not selling, they could have done whatever they wanted and ruined his vision
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Supermalt
Basically this but kid will be fine even if it flops
Website needs big time polish, there's out the box sites that look better.
Edit: I ain't browsed something this unuser friendly in ages, 5 mil..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Martinez
If you built something that had a chance, ANY chance of being REALLY succesfull. Why would you give up on it, at the first opportunity?
He's clearly not driven by money. He wants to see how far he can take it. If it fails, he'll prob start a next thing. If he's had enough of starting companies, he could go work anywhere and earn £200 -£250k calm.
I could build a youtube, snapchat, instagram clone in a week.
Product worth is determined by how many people use it. Like Dave said, If you're first to market, you already have an edge.
Don't you man watch Silicon Valley?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Heero Yuy
The same logic could be applied to Facebook, especially in the early days when they had multi million dollar offers left, right and centre.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Platinum50
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Platinum50
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greens
And facebook have been trying there hardest to create a snapchat competitor ever since they got turned down and have failed with each one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DRC
Plot twist, 5mil was all talk and he just wanted the free publicity
Good luck to him in all seriousness though
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SLEAZE BALL
The offer he got had nothing to do with users cos he has none
What he has is a concept and a code that brings the concept to life
That is what has been values at 5m+
Noone was trying to buy Facebook for millions before it actually had users. Poor example as I said
Comparing apples with oranges.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Heero Yuy
That wasn't my point tbh.
It's not always as easy to replicate something as you're making out. My point being that facebook had a ton of offers when it was still a startup, from companies that had the finances and resources to build their own versions or better, and never did/could.
I'm sure when Google and Microsoft came sniffing around, people thought they were mad for turning them down too.
If you have a look at why facebook is/was so highly valued, their algorithms are right up there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites