Brokedownpalace Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 (edited) 40 minutes ago, Max Entropy said: @JoelKatz Money and control is a funny thing. Funny for the investors and funny for the companies employees. By funny... I mean, people/humans behave very differently. Investors may play games with the co-founders, and with the tech people who have defacto control over the companies' products. The implications for the technical co-founder may be to... "knife the baby". This is seen by everyone in the company and by the investors as a terrible thing. However, the technical co-founder may see this as a control issue. Meaning that the employees and the investors should/could have behaved differently with regard to the technical co-founder that is being/ seen to be disadvantaged. Did 'they' really think the technical people would roll over? The issue is control... founders believe that they know where they are going and believe that the employees and investors should follow the founder. This is at adds with investors goal to seek more control. The money guys can always influence the equation to the disadvantage of the technical co-founder, as this founder is not motivated by money. Employees, executives and investors - are definition - solely motivated by the money. -- So, the proper thing for Ripple would have been to: be upfront and honest with their methods of achieving control, and If there were differences in strategic direction, Ripple should have spun Jed and some number of employees out into a separate company, thus avoiding the attendant downstream drama. I am consistently critical of Ripple management. -- I have not followed the details of Ripple and Jed, but the way Ripple managed the situation was not helpful then, and is not helpful today. It is still possible that Stellar can eat of, or some of Ripple's lunch. IBM is very strategic in the banking sector. Ripple without a Microsoft partner is now vulnerable. Ripple is not nimble, as it must be committed to Ripple existing products for existing reasons. Ripple can no longer pivot. Recall, that Ripple is : a closed system... think Ripple cloud and all the x-Product instances... closed no Eco-system... Ripple is on its own no wallet... gee how can that be?? The only crypto with no wallet. no real tech partners no research connections, and Ripple has baggage in the crypto space, and Ripple could be acquired. Ripple senior management and specifically Larson did not handle this well. Ripple needs to partner with Microsoft, else it will become irrelevant. -- I am reminded of Steve Job's running up a pirate flag on a small campus building, and then developing products that would change the world, while John Sculley fiddled away the company... with the existing investors... in control. Interesting times... Well I don't know bout all this high falutin' negative talk but I do know you've been misspelling the name of the RIpple chairman and chief visionary. Someone on his third consecutive successful fintech startup. Let that sink in. THIRD CONSECUTIVE SUCCESSFUL fintech startup. THE adult in the room. The one who knew the route to success was through boring, slow, frustrating, regulatory compliance. Wisdom baby, pragmatic wisdom. The province of adults. There is no greater individual reason why Ripple is where it is, still poised to do insanely great ****. Yeah, I'm saying that: insanely great ****. He is our ace in the hole.....My two bits, back to dirty pictures. Edited October 28, 2017 by Brokedownpalace Spelling smoothy, Baboly, CrypticMind and 2 others 2 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!Register a new account
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now