@DanGill@ajay_bcv Really?
Maybe I’ll try it then.
I just finished hearing him saying he was a picked on kid but can’t let that idea stand in the reader’s brain but ten seconds before explaining how he walked up to the biggest bully at school and kicked his ass lol.
OK I’ll do the buck, good call, bet is on.
Where some people see “timing estimates are wrong” others wonder how someone so smart and close to the design could say something will debut in volume next year, in reality it’s 5-10, and suspect it’s not an innocent case of mis forecasting and instead see lying about near term prospects of the business for financial gain.
Happened a lot in the 2010s when they were frequently short on cash.
This is, as a matter of principle and a desire for honest markets, offensive to some people.
Again one can prefer “fake until you make it” and ends justify means, the world is a better place for his inventions who cares about the fraud. It’s a very reasonable viewpoint. But I think it’s also very reasonable to be highly offended by the fraud.
@jhong That battery swap was subsidy hacking to claim government money for building battery swap technology. Big fanfare about debuting along i5, cashed check and never heard from again
I am generally in for a bet like this, and the date is fine
I think they are selling a whole lot more than one. I don't think it has to be mass but they did that fake bullshit battery swap on one vehicle, I need more than just a duct taped POS to a friend of Elon. 25? And by a rocket, I assume you aren't claiming the flying part. What are you claiming, just straight ahead rocket car?
Did you even read my reply? What has Red Bull lied or gaslit about? They're mad that rich and powerful people make shit up and half the world stans for them and mocks them for giving a shit about preferring a world where influential people mostly felt held to at least pretending to be truthful.
One can disagree whether this is important at all, or more important than building cool shit, but again, it's just tiresome to strawman the argument against it as "do people not even understand marketing" ... YES of course people understand. Red Bull doesn't honestly pretend that their commercial about growing wings leads you to grow wings. Tesla is honestly pretending they will produce flying cars in the near term.
Tesla demo reactions on my timeline:
55% idiotic Elon fanboy rubes
40% mindless pure Elon haters
5% reasonable people who think it was a sick demo but obv not anything like a real production car
I think you might be misunderstanding most haters.
I think they probably understand that much about brand marketing.
The website and presentation present that the flying product will be sold. If you’re on “team Tesla” sure you just chuckle, silly old Elon.
I think the haters are annoyed not at sci demos or concept cars but at pretending that sci-fi demo concept cars are not that, but are actual production plans.
Sure they should just move on, like Lucy holding the football they get clowned over and over.
But I don’t think it’s useful to pretend that they’re not fans of “fun demos” when their complaint is gaslighting/lying.
I think it’s good to be more excited by the stunt than annoyed at the gaslighting, but also perfectly reasonable to be the opposite.
But I don’t think that people are unaware of the concept of marketing, that feels just like a strawman to enjoy tearing down. Maybe I’m wrong though.
@hdemott3 appreiate the thoughts, I was going somewhere else. I am suggesting that "earning your pro-rata" is BS not because it's not in the contract but it's not what VCs actually do, they give companies money + at best some mildly useful advice+intros. seeking reactions to that.
Question for the founders re: DayOne/Valar discourse.
Claimed: VCs ought to "earn" their future pro-rata.
Set aside whether one should follow the docs or "customary practice"
Is this your experience, that you are getting a lot more than $? $ aren't 95% of what u get?
@posedscaredcity I appreciate the replies but, truly I was asking a GENERAL question, not subtweeting the current saga. I am bored of the d1/v scenario but wondered on more generalized basis, are people looking at their VCs and thinking "who cares about the money, that advice is so good!"
@hapaxpo Maybe it's as someone else suggested, the problem is terrible board members. As a board member I have at times been a useful bulwark against bad board members for teams, and that's pretty useful but again a weird value add, "anti-undermining"
@hapaxpo Interesting! As a founder I liked my board members a lot, good names from top firms, but, c'mon, it was mostly the money.
It seems like the founders I've backed have valued/liked me as a board member, but again, not THAT valuable.
@niteshpant56@pejmannozad That said, early investor who now wants to run an SPV with a bunch of random LPs that have no previous exposure to the company, this doesn't feel great to me either. So mostly I am just saying it's complicated but u can't just say do it for good of company to decide here
@niteshpant56@pejmannozad Hard to say what's fair, but it will be painted to the early supporter that it's down to them to make the room because the benefit they bring is mostly in the past, and (not intentionally) everyone's brain is focused on "that's nice what have you done for me lately"