Facebook former Messenger boss calls WhatsApp cofounder new standard of lowclass(theverge.com)
theverge.com
Facebook former Messenger boss calls WhatsApp cofounder new standard of lowclass
https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/26/17906844/facebook-david-marcus-calls-whatsapp-brian-acton-low-class
15 comments
If he was so principled, he shouldn't have sold his business to a company who's principles are exact opposite of those of his own. And then be sour when they provide liquidity of said business, unable to prove his ideas, and then attacking the company afterwards.
It's obviously good he found a place where his own principles are more inline with the company.
It's obviously good he found a place where his own principles are more inline with the company.
He admits freeely that he sold out and has expressed public regret for doing what he did. He’s also committed something like 1 billion dollars to charity and drives a minivan.
All things considered, seems like a pretty good dude who saw an opportunity to create enough wealth that 10 generations down the line will be taken care of and he took it. Can’t say I would do any different and I doubt many others would either.
All things considered, seems like a pretty good dude who saw an opportunity to create enough wealth that 10 generations down the line will be taken care of and he took it. Can’t say I would do any different and I doubt many others would either.
He said "attacking the people and company that made you a billionaire..."
That was where the Facebook guy lost me. When he took credit for them becoming billionaires.
What made those founders billionaires was their own product insights, good engineering and management, and hard work. Erlang FTW. Yes Facebook converted the value to fungible stocks, but they created that value, not Facebook.
That was where the Facebook guy lost me. When he took credit for them becoming billionaires.
What made those founders billionaires was their own product insights, good engineering and management, and hard work. Erlang FTW. Yes Facebook converted the value to fungible stocks, but they created that value, not Facebook.
According to that Forbes article on the front page, WhatsApp was speaking to Google hence Facebook’s huge offer and promises of monetization.
In other words, they’d be billionaires regardless and this guy is a prick
In other words, they’d be billionaires regardless and this guy is a prick
> For example, WhatsApp founders requested a completely different office layout when their team moved on campus. Much larger desks and personal space, a policy of not speaking out loud in the space, and conference rooms made unavailable to fellow Facebookers nearby. This irritated people at Facebook, but Mark personally supported and defended it.
Unless I am misinterpreting this, Brian and Jan negotiated for and received a separate working environment for the Whatsapp team where they could avoid some of the pitfalls of Facebook's open plan office and actually get work done without interruption. That David seems to be suggesting this as a criticism says a lot.
On a completely unrelated topic...I am reminded of a quote by the writer, Upton Sinclair: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”
Unless I am misinterpreting this, Brian and Jan negotiated for and received a separate working environment for the Whatsapp team where they could avoid some of the pitfalls of Facebook's open plan office and actually get work done without interruption. That David seems to be suggesting this as a criticism says a lot.
On a completely unrelated topic...I am reminded of a quote by the writer, Upton Sinclair: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”
Their part of building 10 was apparently wildly different. Huge desks. Off-limits rooms (not that I ever tried to use them).
This, when FB proper was shrinking desks from 5’ to 4’ and removing gaps to create looooong rows.
People definitely noticed.
This, when FB proper was shrinking desks from 5’ to 4’ and removing gaps to create looooong rows.
People definitely noticed.
This sentence right here is incredibly vague:
> Marcus also accuses Acton of “slow-playing” the implementation of a feature that would let businesses message WhatsApp users and ultimately help with monetization.
What does "monetization" mean? Charging more? Ads? Selling user data? If it means ads or selling user data, then that would directly violate the contract that Acton and Facebook agreed to, and thus Acton would have zero reason to implement it at all.
> Marcus also accuses Acton of “slow-playing” the implementation of a feature that would let businesses message WhatsApp users and ultimately help with monetization.
What does "monetization" mean? Charging more? Ads? Selling user data? If it means ads or selling user data, then that would directly violate the contract that Acton and Facebook agreed to, and thus Acton would have zero reason to implement it at all.
Brian advocated a particular business model for monetizing WhatsApp:
> For his part, Acton had proposed monetizing WhatsApp through a metered-user model, charging, say, a tenth of a penny after a certain large number of free messages were used up. “You build it once, it runs everywhere in every country,” Acton says. “You don’t need a sophisticated sales force. It’s a very simple business.” [0]
David is saying that Brian, though advocating for this model and against the alternative of monetizing data, didn't put in any effort to demonstrate this model was workable:
> During this time, it became pretty clear that while advocating for business messaging, and being given the opportunity to build and deliver on that promise, Brian actively slow-played the execution, and never truly went for it. In my view, if you’re passionate about a certain path — in this case, letting businesses message people and charging for it — and if you have internal questions about it, then work hard to prove that your approach has legs and demonstrate the value. [1]
[0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2018/09/26/exclusive...
[1] https://www.facebook.com/notes/david-marcus/the-other-side-o...
> For his part, Acton had proposed monetizing WhatsApp through a metered-user model, charging, say, a tenth of a penny after a certain large number of free messages were used up. “You build it once, it runs everywhere in every country,” Acton says. “You don’t need a sophisticated sales force. It’s a very simple business.” [0]
David is saying that Brian, though advocating for this model and against the alternative of monetizing data, didn't put in any effort to demonstrate this model was workable:
> During this time, it became pretty clear that while advocating for business messaging, and being given the opportunity to build and deliver on that promise, Brian actively slow-played the execution, and never truly went for it. In my view, if you’re passionate about a certain path — in this case, letting businesses message people and charging for it — and if you have internal questions about it, then work hard to prove that your approach has legs and demonstrate the value. [1]
[0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2018/09/26/exclusive...
[1] https://www.facebook.com/notes/david-marcus/the-other-side-o...
[deleted]
It's amazing how out of touch employees of advertising spyware companies like this David Marcus fellow are. I guess they have to lie to themselves that they're doing something, anything good, otherwise they'd go crazy from the cognitive dissonance.
Acton should get over his guilt, ignore the corporate attack puppies and use those billions to fight against the Facebooks of this world.
Acton should get over his guilt, ignore the corporate attack puppies and use those billions to fight against the Facebooks of this world.
I also had to laugh out loud when I came across this statement:
Facebook is truly the only company that’s singularly about people.
Switch of the fucking ads and the stock price goes to zero.
Facebook is truly the only company that’s singularly about people.
Switch of the fucking ads and the stock price goes to zero.
Also, walking away from ~ $850 mil and investing time and money into Signal speaks a lot about Brian's commitment to privacy. He admits he was a sellout. He didn't mince words but David's last paragraph, Facebook being all about people but not about selling-things/entertaining/helping-find-information is disingenuous. Facebook is all about sucking in people's attention, so they can sell ads. They want to suck as much information about people as possible; entertain you as much as possible with mindless video and photo sharing. There is nothing wrong with a business making money. David shouldn't delude himself and others into believing Facebook is holier than almost any other business. I guess, he has to keep up the pretenses as an exec. sigh!