Coinbase CEO Tweets ‘Quit and Find a Company You Believe In’(forbes.com)
forbes.com
Coinbase CEO Tweets ‘Quit and Find a Company You Believe In’
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2022/06/11/coinbase-ceo-tweets-quit-and-find-a-company-you-believe-in-to-disgruntled-employees/
106 comments
Coinbase’s only moat is regulation and it’s alliance with a bank. It’s not a strong moat. This allows companies like FTX to pay consumers to switch over.
Your valuing their name brand recognition at 0?
Their brand name is probably worth less than 0 at this point. Outside of crypto circles, they're unknown. Inside crypto circles, they're known for freezing people's accounts at random and not having any customer service when it happens. Their market share is going down too. https://cryptoslate.com/ftx-trading-volume-surpasses-coinbas...
They had a nice IPO, but I hope you sold at the top.
They had a nice IPO, but I hope you sold at the top.
They are also known for freezing account access whenever bitcoin is crashing.
Yes. Not as a hater but it’s what blockchain was built for. No one cares about brand when they can use another exchange and get exactly the same outcome. It’s a double edge sword.
It’s still very early in whatever the future of this stuff is going to be.
If you look at other technology frontiers that were to eventually mature, many of the pioneering brands that were very well known at the time became just a mention in the historical narrative.
I think one can make a fair argument that there’s a long road ahead and that Coinbase’s future will have much to do with their positioning (product, partnerships, sticky user capture) and little to do with their brand.
If you look at other technology frontiers that were to eventually mature, many of the pioneering brands that were very well known at the time became just a mention in the historical narrative.
I think one can make a fair argument that there’s a long road ahead and that Coinbase’s future will have much to do with their positioning (product, partnerships, sticky user capture) and little to do with their brand.
No one really knows who the fuck Coinbase is outside of some very small circles.
At least Brian Armstrong's twitter profile picture is mathematically protected by an NFT on the blockchain, so nobody can right-click and copy his cartoon face or business model.
Oh, wait...
Oh, wait...
I don’t know anything about it, but it looks like FTX isn’t available in the US and FTX.US is banned in New York state?
Plenty of smart people know they don't know enough to have opinions strong enough to act on, and enough information to know who to blame for things.
What does the traitors 8 have to do with this? They left and founded companies they believe in.
No one in the industry really respects coinbase and most people I know have been bearish on them for a long time (some of them profiting handsomely on shorting COIN after the IPO). General consensus is that FTX is going to eat their lunch.
How has FTX caught up in just three years? That's pretty incredible.
Smarter people who are better at pattern matching and/or math.
aka web3's SBF
aka web3's SBF
Quite a few centralized blockchain exchanges have come and gone in the last 10 years. Coinbase is no different. I won’t be surprised if they implode.
Coinbase was successful because their biggest competitor at the beginning was Mt Gox. Big VC firms saw the opportunity and pumped crypto for the past decade and those small exchanges imploded.
Well now crypto is ‘legitimate’ and Coinbase has to compete with big players. They’ll probably stick around but their market share will continue to decline. Not much growth there, writing is on the wall.
Well now crypto is ‘legitimate’ and Coinbase has to compete with big players. They’ll probably stick around but their market share will continue to decline. Not much growth there, writing is on the wall.
Not to mention Coinbase is only a small size player outside the US. Binance is the biggest exchange in the world. No one outside US uses Coinbase, it’s fees are ridiculous.
> or end up stagnant and dysfunctional (Facebook)
Facebook still one of the largest tech companies, and the largest social media platform, and messaging.
Facebook still one of the largest tech companies, and the largest social media platform, and messaging.
> end up stagnant and dysfunctional (Facebook)
Yeah what a failure that was! In the same realm of failures such as Microsoft, Google, IBM and AT&T
Facebook has reached the maximum extension it can possibly have , they stopped just before being subject to DOJ breakup lawsuit like Microsoft, IBM and AT&T before them.
I am sick and tired of this narrative of Facebook being a failure, just because you can't get rich via buying the stock and waiting for capital appreciation anymore doesn't make it a failure.
It's a company making 100+ billions in sales per year with basically no physical infrastructure and amazing margins still.
Their future isn't guranteed but nobody's is.
Yeah what a failure that was! In the same realm of failures such as Microsoft, Google, IBM and AT&T
Facebook has reached the maximum extension it can possibly have , they stopped just before being subject to DOJ breakup lawsuit like Microsoft, IBM and AT&T before them.
I am sick and tired of this narrative of Facebook being a failure, just because you can't get rich via buying the stock and waiting for capital appreciation anymore doesn't make it a failure.
It's a company making 100+ billions in sales per year with basically no physical infrastructure and amazing margins still.
Their future isn't guranteed but nobody's is.
Exactly. I don't know how anyone can be further from reality to keep screaming that (Meta) is a failure; remote from reality.
It is in fact the first and the fastest company founded in the 21st century to reach $1TN valuation. Tesla Inc. came second to that. I don't think anyone else can say that. Maybe that is also failure as well?
> I am sick and tired of this narrative of Facebook being a failure, just because you can't get rich via buying the stock and waiting for capital appreciation anymore doesn't make it a failure.
The company is still profitable after all these years, scandals, fines etc and they still are doing fine. The death of the company has been greatly exaggerated and for those who don't want to hear it, I'm afraid that they (Meta) is still going to be around for another decade.
It is in fact the first and the fastest company founded in the 21st century to reach $1TN valuation. Tesla Inc. came second to that. I don't think anyone else can say that. Maybe that is also failure as well?
> I am sick and tired of this narrative of Facebook being a failure, just because you can't get rich via buying the stock and waiting for capital appreciation anymore doesn't make it a failure.
The company is still profitable after all these years, scandals, fines etc and they still are doing fine. The death of the company has been greatly exaggerated and for those who don't want to hear it, I'm afraid that they (Meta) is still going to be around for another decade.
I met Brian once. He has the same psychological traits and behavior as those whom society refers to as narcissists, e.g. Zuckerberg. A dime a dozen in the Silicon Valley CEO class.
These crypto companies are all floating a level above the scam known as "crypto" in general. In my POV, if crypto crashes hard these companies might as well end up disappearing in a fortnight.
[deleted]
The quote in context: Second, if you have no confidence in the execs or CEO of a company then why are you working at that company? Quit and find a company to work at that you believe in!
I don't find it particulary nasty and know nothing about cb's culture.
I don't find it particulary nasty and know nothing about cb's culture.
It's so unfair to the CEO of a get-rich-quick pyramid scam when his employees pump and dump their own company, then pull the rug and resign when the going gets tough.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Smart people are very likely to have opinions AND to understand they are detached from your job or your personal relationships.
I am pretty political ( and I'd be happy to debate you to death and then go for drinks with you.
I've worked in woke leftist companies all my life (most, if not all, tech places are). Most of my friends don't agree politically with me, I dated people who were my political arch-nemesis. I had brilliant coworkers I enjoyed working with, with whom I shared zero political ideas.
I still have to meet someone I consider smart on the workplace that can't detach his political beliefs to the task at hand.
Those political activists types were always busy organising committees and chatting on slack instead of delivering features. I wouldn't hire them (independently from their politics).
I am pretty political ( and I'd be happy to debate you to death and then go for drinks with you.
I've worked in woke leftist companies all my life (most, if not all, tech places are). Most of my friends don't agree politically with me, I dated people who were my political arch-nemesis. I had brilliant coworkers I enjoyed working with, with whom I shared zero political ideas.
I still have to meet someone I consider smart on the workplace that can't detach his political beliefs to the task at hand.
Those political activists types were always busy organising committees and chatting on slack instead of delivering features. I wouldn't hire them (independently from their politics).
I don't know everything about Coinbase's history, but I agree with most of the tweet. Airing dirty laundry in public, and arm twisting management is not really a great strategy. There will always be a power asymmetry, and it was understood as such when the employee joined such an organization. Using stock options which are a form of compensation benefit to then position oneself to be above the management is silly. "Smart people" is not some kind of a character trait that engages in such behavior.
> Airing dirty laundry in public, and arm twisting management is not really a great strategy.
I'm decidedly split on this one. There are circumstances that warrant disclosure, even in spite of agreements to secrecy. I think everyone is better off for knowing about the Pentagon Papers or Snowden leaks, or the massive fraud pulled off by Bernie Madoff.
I'm decidedly split on this one. There are circumstances that warrant disclosure, even in spite of agreements to secrecy. I think everyone is better off for knowing about the Pentagon Papers or Snowden leaks, or the massive fraud pulled off by Bernie Madoff.
Okay, but I'm not sure what the pentagon papers have to do with coinbase or anything we're discussing here. It goes without saying that I am not proposing a principle that applies in every single situation, for every single person. I don't know anyone who writes comments with that assumption.
The previous tweet is also wild:
"[...] But our culture is to praise in public, and criticize in private."
Like seriously? In a thread where he’s publicly criticizing the actions of his employees, he really has the chutzpah to point to some corporate "value" about expressing grievances privately?
"[...] But our culture is to praise in public, and criticize in private."
Like seriously? In a thread where he’s publicly criticizing the actions of his employees, he really has the chutzpah to point to some corporate "value" about expressing grievances privately?
I can think of a reasonable argument for this. After something is made public, responding to it in public might sometimes be necessary. It would be better if the dispute never became public, but too late now.
And after taking a grievance public, it seems somewhat unreasonable not to expect a public response?
Though often, companies don’t respond publicly, and that might be wiser. And responding on Twitter seems like a bad move compared to a blog post or press release? But many people can’t help themselves.
And after taking a grievance public, it seems somewhat unreasonable not to expect a public response?
Though often, companies don’t respond publicly, and that might be wiser. And responding on Twitter seems like a bad move compared to a blog post or press release? But many people can’t help themselves.
I don't blame him for responding publicly. I do however think Armstrong is behaving blatantly hypocritically by calling out his employees for violating the corporate values (that he wrote!), while he himself ignores them out of expedience.
“Find a company you believe in” is the exact reason I’ve been ignoring Coinbase recruiters for the last few years.
Seems like this is good for both you and coinbase?
Right, but why are they reaching out to him without knowing if he "believes" in them at all?
That's probably one of the reasons they make their polarizing stances known so publicly — to make it less likely that candidates who aren't interested in working for them know it and don't waste everyone's time going through the interview process.
A coworker once told me you can also believe in a product if you believe you’re going to make a lot of money by selling it.
That still requires you to believe that the product is worth more than it is today, or that you can sell it for more than it's worth.
clickbait title of a clickbait article
better off reading the original thread
https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/15353049437284147...
better off reading the original thread
https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/15353049437284147...
I agree; this thread is very reasonable IMO.
Getting self-referential though — that tweet points to the prior HN thread!
Thanks. In context this thread is a dupe of the thread referenced on Twitter (in which Armstrong links to the tweet in the top post).
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31690452
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31690452
I can't believe that got traction. I saw it and figured it was just some disgruntled employees in denial about the current state of the crypto space.
I like a lot of what I see from the Coinbase CEO. This response was very reasonable, and I liked the "apolitical" stance the company took to focus on its mission, not political activism. I just don't like the company's industry and product.
> This response was very reasonable, and I liked the "apolitical" stance the company took to focus on its mission, not political activism.
That's a pretty funny statement given that the "mission" of the crypto world is an explicitly political one, overlapping significantly with extreme libertarian and anarchocapitalist movements.
That's a pretty funny statement given that the "mission" of the crypto world is an explicitly political one, overlapping significantly with extreme libertarian and anarchocapitalist movements.
As an ancap I've plenty of friends who put everything in crypto and made ridiculous money and I'm sure they'll try to advance the cause - personally I don't buy the idea crypto is very much ancap and I'm pretty sure most people in crypto are in there just for speculation until the government comes to close everything (or make it useless with regulations).
An ancap idea would be to create a private bank which creates a currency and back it with real goods.
Anyway crypto would be at best a technical solution to a political problem (government existing) and you'll never fix a political problem with technology alone.
An ancap idea would be to create a private bank which creates a currency and back it with real goods.
Anyway crypto would be at best a technical solution to a political problem (government existing) and you'll never fix a political problem with technology alone.
> private bank which creates a currency and back it with real goods.
Stock ticker AABB, and others.
Stock ticker AABB, and others.
Just because they engage in one, narrow political dialogue doesn't mean that have to or should engage in _every_ political dialogue.
Sure, but that’s more “my politics” than “apolitical”. Their messaging should reflect that.
The Coinbase CEO _did_ say that in his letter opposing talking politics internally that are not associated with the company's mission.
It’s more of “the company’s mission” rather than “my politics”. The employees signed a contract with a company not Brian
The apolitical stance is nonsense given that the only reason Coinbase exists is due to the explicitly political actions of Satoshi and the early BTC community.
>clickbait title of a clickbait article
The third tweet in the thread literally says: "Quit and find a company to work at that you believe in!"
Do you know what "click bait" means?
The third tweet in the thread literally says: "Quit and find a company to work at that you believe in!"
Do you know what "click bait" means?
The thread contains much more context that the article ignores. Which is funny given that tweets (even threads) are generally much more condensed than articles.
Yellow journalism at it’s finest.
Yellow journalism at it’s finest.
>The thread contains much more context that the article ignores.
That doesn't make the title click bait.
>Yellow journalism at it’s finest.
Yes, we should only use unbiased sources, like the words of the CEO who oversaw an 80% drop in share price and whom the employees are trying to oust, who starts his thread with "This is dumb".
That doesn't make the title click bait.
>Yellow journalism at it’s finest.
Yes, we should only use unbiased sources, like the words of the CEO who oversaw an 80% drop in share price and whom the employees are trying to oust, who starts his thread with "This is dumb".
I don't think we should reward employees for bringing the stock up, but blame the CEO for when the stock drops. Its a team effort either way.
>That doesn't make the title click bait.
It does. Sensationalism and misleading headlines designed to drive an emotional response are considered click bait too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clickbait
>That doesn't make the title click bait.
It does. Sensationalism and misleading headlines designed to drive an emotional response are considered click bait too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clickbait
How is it clickbait if it's a verbatim quote? In context it means exactly what the headline says and the article does a pretty good job adding the context leading up to his tantrum. To me, it's extraordinarily immature leadership. He's on twitter fighting a PR campaign against his own shortcomings and throwing his employees under the bus.
I went through something similar at a much more ethical company where the CEO absorbed public criticism and addressed by hosting all-hands and taking direct, unfiltered questions from employees and never said shit in public. People who were really being unreasonable got fired, several key people who sympathized with the dissenters quit as is their prerogative at any point. The ones who stayed really wanted the company to succeed and leadership very well knew it and respected it. Armstrong is very clearly saying "This is my company, not yours" which is technically true, but anathema to millenial ethics and I'd argue anathema to the founding principals of crypto.
Mind you, this is all happening at a company that produces actual value as a top priority and isn't a just a platform to extract rents from suckers.
I went through something similar at a much more ethical company where the CEO absorbed public criticism and addressed by hosting all-hands and taking direct, unfiltered questions from employees and never said shit in public. People who were really being unreasonable got fired, several key people who sympathized with the dissenters quit as is their prerogative at any point. The ones who stayed really wanted the company to succeed and leadership very well knew it and respected it. Armstrong is very clearly saying "This is my company, not yours" which is technically true, but anathema to millenial ethics and I'd argue anathema to the founding principals of crypto.
Mind you, this is all happening at a company that produces actual value as a top priority and isn't a just a platform to extract rents from suckers.
A related question: do people think it's possible for a major tech CEO to avoid having much of a social media presence?
Seems like Armstrong is really shooting himself in the foot here by running to Twitter and posting his brain dump on the petition. Also, I think he's painted himself into a corner over time by doing the same thing on other occasions in reaction to other internal matters at his company. He really ought to follow the advice he himself gives in the original thread: praise publicly and criticize privately. It's actually great advice but it applies to everyone.
Otherwise, I find I don't actually have much of an opinion about who's right here. I just find myself thinking, "If I were him, I'd just stay clear of Twitter."
Seems like Armstrong is really shooting himself in the foot here by running to Twitter and posting his brain dump on the petition. Also, I think he's painted himself into a corner over time by doing the same thing on other occasions in reaction to other internal matters at his company. He really ought to follow the advice he himself gives in the original thread: praise publicly and criticize privately. It's actually great advice but it applies to everyone.
Otherwise, I find I don't actually have much of an opinion about who's right here. I just find myself thinking, "If I were him, I'd just stay clear of Twitter."
Reflecting on this further, it seems like so many public figures have villified themselves in this age simply by over sharing on Twitter. It paints a picture of an immature person who gives too much weight to their own opinion and lacks self control.
I feel like Elon Musk is another example of someone who wouldn't seem nearly so much like a jerk now if he could have just kept his mouth shut half the time.
I feel like Elon Musk is another example of someone who wouldn't seem nearly so much like a jerk now if he could have just kept his mouth shut half the time.
But rich people love that. They have all the money they want, so the only thing left to attain is affirmation of their opinions.
Quit and Find a Company Whose CEO You Can Believe
Way I see it, working for Coinbase is like working for any gambling startup. For a significant amount of employees it's not going to be about "believing in the company's mission", it's going to be about making a lot of money quickly.
Stay and unionize. You get to keep your job and make it a better job. And the NLRB would love to hear about anti-organization efforts at a big tech company that violate labor law.
Let’s not just shrug and say “we’ve tried nothing and we’re all out of options.”
Let’s not just shrug and say “we’ve tried nothing and we’re all out of options.”
You’d still be working at a cryptocurrency company, though.
When the whole purpose of the company is scamming people and pushing get-rich-quick pyramid schemes, the employees shouldn't trust the CEO any more than the company's customers/victims can trust the CEO.
Was the primary complaint about employee treatment (e.g., the rescission of offer letters)? I thought it was mostly about other leadership decisions, which would not be fixable via unionization.
That is, making a union doesn't enable you to transform all aspects of a company, like "The over-prioritization of certain products, which has led to a lack of focus on other important issues like infrastructure" or "The failure of the Coinbase NFT platform".
These were the first two items listed in the erstwhile no-confidence letter.
That is, making a union doesn't enable you to transform all aspects of a company, like "The over-prioritization of certain products, which has led to a lack of focus on other important issues like infrastructure" or "The failure of the Coinbase NFT platform".
These were the first two items listed in the erstwhile no-confidence letter.
That could cause the end of Coinbase. It's busy dealing with less interest in crypto; it doesn't need to add labor negotiations into the mix. It's easier to get wins when a company is doing well.
Lol what a delusional guy. He wanted everyone he hired to believe "in their mission" and take ownership in everything the company does, but he's okay to not care about them and would push them to feel free to quit. Lol.
I really hope Coinbase goes under along with cryptocurrency. Such a horrible space that provides almost zero utility for humanity.
I have to say he's right you know.
Just like the free-software movement that wanted to remove all non-free software from existence, some of those folks instead joined the likes of Microsoft, Google, Apple, and Meta and they have a nasty and vile history of unethical practises which are just a nasty as Coinbase who were also being involved with VCs pumping and dumping on retail.
But are we trying to find angels here? The pattern is the same. They DO NOT care and they will NOT change. So it is pointless expecting them to.
So if you don't like them you are free to leave, just like you were free to join them in the first place. Or be a founder at your own company.
Just like the free-software movement that wanted to remove all non-free software from existence, some of those folks instead joined the likes of Microsoft, Google, Apple, and Meta and they have a nasty and vile history of unethical practises which are just a nasty as Coinbase who were also being involved with VCs pumping and dumping on retail.
But are we trying to find angels here? The pattern is the same. They DO NOT care and they will NOT change. So it is pointless expecting them to.
So if you don't like them you are free to leave, just like you were free to join them in the first place. Or be a founder at your own company.
> they will NOT change
Their stock is down 83%, the company has a hiring freeze, and the CEO is begging employees to quit. Seems like there's a non-trivial chance that if they keep with their current trajectory the company will simply cease to exist.
Their stock is down 83%, the company has a hiring freeze, and the CEO is begging employees to quit. Seems like there's a non-trivial chance that if they keep with their current trajectory the company will simply cease to exist.
Rescinding accepted job offers is a real shit-heel thing to do, unless you are literally going out of business.
What do you want them to do, lay-off existing employees instead?
They said the new employees were told that their offer would be upheld at least up until 2 weeks before it wasn't. So what I'd expect them to do is not be terrible human beings.
Maybe plan ahead, deal with the choice and bring the person on and find a way to make it work, or pay a severance. It's a real shit thing to do, especially considering that prospects may have begun offboarding from their existing employer for an opportunity.
This is a business. Yea, a shitty thing to do but they don’t owe those people a job.
Unfortunately, I think we have a large contingent of people like yourself that haven’t been thru a deep downturn and have grown used to the endless perks that have been thrown at tech employees and think it is normal. You should expect the power dynamic in the labor/employee relationship to shift quickly to employer as macro conditions continue to deteriorate.
In other words, don’t expect your next employer will let you bring your dog to work.
Unfortunately, I think we have a large contingent of people like yourself that haven’t been thru a deep downturn and have grown used to the endless perks that have been thrown at tech employees and think it is normal. You should expect the power dynamic in the labor/employee relationship to shift quickly to employer as macro conditions continue to deteriorate.
In other words, don’t expect your next employer will let you bring your dog to work.
[deleted]
If you're going to take this position, then don't complain when employees only look out for their own interests as well (for example, the topic of this post.)
They should have planned better and not made the offers in the first place?
Be more fiscally responsible. Isn’t that the advice rich people keep giving people living in poverty? I think expecting that from a multi billion dollar company is actually realistic don’t you?
They could be more forward-looking when making hiring decisions.
Shareholders to eat the costs and own up to their mistake. Employees shouldn't be the ones always getting the short end of the stick.
The average new hire should be a better fit for the company than a bottom 25% performer.
[deleted]
A job offer to me was rescinded, once. It changed my life dramatically because I quit my job and then had nothing, the rug pulled out from under me. I was young, inexperienced, and living in a rural area, the worst of combinations.
The company's owner was in prison within a couple years for financial fraud.
The company's owner was in prison within a couple years for financial fraud.
Given this entire thing in context, and not as a quasi-clickbait headline (he literally said it verbatim, but he seems to have meant it slightly less intellectually honest than the headline implies) ...
You know what? Quit and find a company you believe in. I wouldn't want someone that doesn't believe in what they're doing working for me, and I wouldn't want to work for a company who I don't believe in. Don't get me wrong, our economy is in shambles, the world is falling apart, today is March 833rd 2020, our collective stress levels are at an all time high and only rising, and we're all out of the mental juice to handle both being alive at work and also job hunting: do it anyways, go find a job that is actually fulfilling to you.
Don't let shitty companies rob you of being actually successful in the ways that matter to you. You gotta live with yourself and what you've done, and the only person that cares about you is you. Your employer does not, and never will, give a shit about you.
You know what? Quit and find a company you believe in. I wouldn't want someone that doesn't believe in what they're doing working for me, and I wouldn't want to work for a company who I don't believe in. Don't get me wrong, our economy is in shambles, the world is falling apart, today is March 833rd 2020, our collective stress levels are at an all time high and only rising, and we're all out of the mental juice to handle both being alive at work and also job hunting: do it anyways, go find a job that is actually fulfilling to you.
Don't let shitty companies rob you of being actually successful in the ways that matter to you. You gotta live with yourself and what you've done, and the only person that cares about you is you. Your employer does not, and never will, give a shit about you.
I love most of Brian Armstrong’s response. I like that he deals with employee activism and doesn’t just shy away from it like a lot of big tech with a sf bay area foci.
Here though, I wonder if it is truly possible for employees to make the same suggestions internally.
This is an anonymous list of grievances, attempting to use some cryptographic signature solution to show support without revealing who supported.
Even taking out the proposal/demand for resignations, I wonder if the product suggestions can be made to any effect, internally.
Here though, I wonder if it is truly possible for employees to make the same suggestions internally.
This is an anonymous list of grievances, attempting to use some cryptographic signature solution to show support without revealing who supported.
Even taking out the proposal/demand for resignations, I wonder if the product suggestions can be made to any effect, internally.
Coinbase has done a poor job with planning and handled this challenging circumstance very poorly. That’s clear. That includes poor social media management.
Many, including myself, admired this company because many of our smartest peers were joining in droves. Thought of Coinbase as their dream job. It is clear that that is no longer true.
Therefore when they say that they survived a crypto winter before, what they miss is that they previously had many that rooted for their success. I hope they hold no illusion this time.
Many, including myself, admired this company because many of our smartest peers were joining in droves. Thought of Coinbase as their dream job. It is clear that that is no longer true.
Therefore when they say that they survived a crypto winter before, what they miss is that they previously had many that rooted for their success. I hope they hold no illusion this time.
Problem with ESOPs is that many times the board and CEO can act contrary to shareholders, specifically employee shareholders
Maybe they should invent trustless employment.
[deleted]
I’m surprised by the downvotes on the other people’s comments here!
"...as people who have the rugged pulled out from under them...".
WTF? Am I reading Forbes or some old MySpace page?
Way to not proofread your shit at a major publication and put an automatic back button in the second paragraph.
TD;DR
Too dumb didn't read it.
WTF? Am I reading Forbes or some old MySpace page?
Way to not proofread your shit at a major publication and put an automatic back button in the second paragraph.
TD;DR
Too dumb didn't read it.
> Way to not proofread you shit at a major publication and put an automatic back button in the second paragraph.
Sometimes it slips through!
Sometimes it slips through!
Beat my edit! Well played. But I'm not Forbes either.
I highly suggest reading “An incomplete history of Forbes.com as a platform for scams, grift, and bad journalism” [0], as it covers the situation with Forbes’ declining quality quite well.
[0]: https://www.niemanlab.org/2022/02/an-incomplete-history-of-f...
[0]: https://www.niemanlab.org/2022/02/an-incomplete-history-of-f...
>Forbes’ declining quality quite well.
It's essentially a blog platform, and has been for a while.
I'm not sure why that matters in regards to the content of the article, though.
It's essentially a blog platform, and has been for a while.
I'm not sure why that matters in regards to the content of the article, though.
Thank you, reading it now.
That's cute coming from a C-Suite who has already rooked billions out of investors on a business model of "lets be the financial industry but drag our feet on compliance".
Mayhaps, just mayhaps... People are starting to realize the money is going to flow wherever some small number of people want it to, and are realizing that the only way to counter the perceived misallocation is from the inside?
Or mayhaps, they found the Company and the Work, but the Executives are the ones who don't fit? Bottom up pressure is a bitch, ain't it?
Mayhaps, just mayhaps... People are starting to realize the money is going to flow wherever some small number of people want it to, and are realizing that the only way to counter the perceived misallocation is from the inside?
Or mayhaps, they found the Company and the Work, but the Executives are the ones who don't fit? Bottom up pressure is a bitch, ain't it?
Brian Armstrong wouldn’t have gotten very far with Coinbase if it was just him, on his own. Companies with this sort of management either blow up (RIM) or end up stagnant and dysfunctional (Facebook). He will end up alienating all of the people who he needs to resuscitate his company; moreover the sort of weird, semi-nuts people who create all of the great stuff in our industry (e.g. von Neumann) won’t go anywhere near his company.
Coinbase may be the centralized crypto exchange with the lions’ share of liquidity today, but there’s no guarantee they’ll even exist in an industry that evolves past its shitcoin phase. Maybe he thinks he can single-handedly navigate this transition on his own; let’s see. Clearly, the market doesn’t think so — pretty ironic that he’s a market-maker who ignores market signals…
Edit: I want to note that this tweet is toxic and disturbing on so many levels… It’s also comical given the history of our industry and the Traitorous Eight.
https://mobile.twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/1535305081...